'  LIBRARY  OF  THE 
UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 
AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 


329.942 

R725c 


•a . 

> 


,  / 
"  ■  : 

’  4 


■  . , 


The  person  charging  this  material  is  re¬ 
sponsible  for  its  return  on  or  before  the 
Latest  Date  stamped  below. 

Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books 
are  reasons  for  disciplinary  action  and  may 
result  in  dismissal  from  the  University. 

University  of  Illinois  Library 


MAY  -3 

may  2  A  l|a69 


L161—  0-1096 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


In  Its  Social  and  Economic  Aspects 

PJJJl 

yet 


BY 

FRANK  F.  ROSENBLATT,  A.  M. 


PART  I 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 
FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE 

Faculty  of  Political  Science 
Columbia  University 


mmny  of  Illinois  LiBK/unr 
APR  A  7  m7 

NEW  YORK 

1916 


Copyright,  1916 

BY 

FRANK  F.  ROSENBLATT 


KATHERINE  GOLDING  ROSENBLATT 

IN  APPRECIATION  OF  TRUE  COMRADESHIP 
THIS  WORK  IS  DEDICATED 
BY  HER  HUSBAND 


The  Author 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


Je  ne  propose  rien, 
je  n’  impose  rien: 
Y  expose. 


PREFACE 

Society,  like  every  individual,  has  a  bias  of  its  own: 
while  frequently  ready  to  make  a  lasting  sensation  of  one 
social  event,  it  is  just  as  prone  to  ignore  other  phenomena 
of  no  less  historical  importance.  The  study  of  the  nature 
and  the  causes  of  the  social  bias,  in  the  broad  sense  of  the 
word,  would  be  an  interesting  and  grateful  task  for  the  so¬ 
ciologist,  while  the  analysis  of  the  particular  social  event 
must  be  confined,  according  to  the  nature  of  the  latter,  to  a 
distinct  branch  of  the  so-called  Social  Sciences. 

The  Chartist  Movement  is  one  of  the  tacitly  ignored  fac¬ 
tors  of  the  social  evolution  of  the  nineteenth  century. 
People  have  always  spoken  of  the  personal  characteristics  of 
John  Russell,  Disraeli,  or  Gladstone,  far  more  than  of  the 
aspirations  of  several  million  men  who  believed  in,  strove 
and  suffered  for  the  cause  known  as  Chartism.  By  far, 
more  has  been  written  of  individuals  like  Robert  Owen  and 
Richard  Cobden  than  of  the  whole  revolutionary  movement 
which  embraced  a  period  of  more  than  a  decade.  The  stu¬ 
dent,  indeed,  knows  from  his  history  that  Chartism  was  a 
political  movement;  that  the  Chartists  fought  for  “six 
7]  7 


8 


PREFACE 


[8 


points  ”  which  were  embodied  in  the  People’s  Charter.  He 
undoubtedly  knows  also  the  funny  side  of  the  story,  and,  to¬ 
gether  with  the  writer  of  his  history,  mocks  those  fraudulent 
fellows,  the  Chartists,  who  affixed  the  signatures  of  Queen 
Victoria  and  a  few  other  high  dignitaries  to  the  petition 
of  almost  one-fifth  of  the  English  nation.  Incidentally, 
one  meets  some  attestation  of  Chartism  as  “  the  only  genu¬ 
ine,  earnest,  serious,  popular  movement  in  England  since  the 
days  of  the  commonwealth,”  1  and  hears  that  “the  story  of 
the  great  social  movement  which  is  comprised  in  the  history 
of  Chartism  is  of  greater  importance  than  the  disputes  of 
the  Whigs  and  Tories.”  2  But  it  is  a  rather  curious  fact  that, 
excepting  Gammage’s  History  of  the  Chartist  Movement, 
which  lays  no  claim  to  any  scientific  analysis  of  the  move¬ 
ment  and  its  causes,  there  is  not  a  single  work  in  the 
English  language  devoted  to  the  subject  which  might  satisfy 
the  more  earnest  student. 

The  aim  of  this  work  is  not  only  to  give  a  fair  and  im¬ 
partial  presentation  of  the  facts,  but  also  to  make  an  attempt 
at  their  interpretation  and  to  show  their  interrelation.  The 
social  life  of  England  during  the  first  half  of  the  last  century 
in  all  its  important  aspects  will  have  to  be  brought  into  the 


limelight.  The  political  situation  must,  of  course,  serve  as  a 
background  for  the  picture  of  a  movement  carried  on 

o  r  ***h~iM  - -  - - . - 


ostensibly  for  political  reform.  But  the  study  of  none  of 
the  social  and  political  conditions  can  be  compared  in  weight 
with  the  analysis  of  the  strictly  economic  state  of  that  period. 
Indeed,  whatever  we  may  think  of  the  Materialistic  Con¬ 
ception  of  History  as  a  general  philosophy,  there  can  hardly 
be  any  doubt  that  in  all  the  struggles  of  labor,  the  “  bread 


1  William  Clarke,  Political  Science  Quarterly,  vol.  iii,  1888,  p.  555. 

2  Spencer  Walpole,  History  of  England  from  the  Conclusion  of  the 
Great  War  in  1815,  London,  1886,  vol.  iii,  p.  500. 


PREFACE 


9 


9l 

ancLfark  questionilis  the  very  seed  of  historical  causation. 
Regarding  the  Chartist  Movement  primarily  as  a  labor 
movement  and  as  the  first  compact  form  of  class  struggle, 
the  author,  therefore,  deemed  it  necessary,  after  a  succinct 
survey  of  the  political  situation,  to  devote  the  first  part  of 
his  work  to  a  careful  examination  of  the  economic  condi¬ 
tion  in  general  and  the  labor  condition  in  particular  which 
prevailed  in  “  Merry  England  ”  immediately  before  and 
during  the  period  of  the  Chartist  Movement 

The  present  monograph  comprises  only  the  first  stages  of 
the  movement.  The  original  intention  to  publish  an  ex¬ 
tensive  study  covering  the  whole  period  could  have  been 
carried  out  only  by  going  to  England  for  the  purpose  of 
collecting  additional  material.  This  design  was  frustrated 
by  the  present  war.  It  has  therefore  become  necessary  to 
divide  the  work  into  two  volumes,  the  second  of  which,  the 
author  hopes,  will  appear  at  a  later  date. 

In  the  preparation  of  this  work,  it  was  considered  essen¬ 
tial  to  guard  against  personal  predilections  and  sympathies. 
The  material  was  collected  with  care  from  first-hand 
sources ;  the  facts  were  presented  without  any  design  to  fit  a 
pet  theory ;  and  the  heroes  of  the  story  were  allowed  to  intro¬ 
duce  themselves  and  to  play  their  roles  without  any  stage- 
managing  on  the  part  of  the  historian.  It  is,  perhaps,  on 
account  of  this  impartiality  and  lack  of  prejudice  that  some 
portraits  vary  materially  from  those  which  have  been  hither¬ 
to  drawn. 

In  conclusion,  the  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  his  pro¬ 
found  gratitude  to  Professor  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman  both 
for  the  interest  he  has  always  taken  in  this  work  and  for 
the  privilege  of  using  his  invaluable  collection  of  Chartist 
literature  and  documents. 


April  22,  1916. 


F.  F.  R. 


CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Preface . 7-9 

CHAPTER  I 
Prototypes  of  Chartism 

Chartism  and  the  “  six  points  ” .  21 

Distinct  labor  movement .  21 

xpression  of  class  consciousness .  21 

The  Levellers  and  Cromwell .  22 

Society  of  the  Supporters  of  the  Bill  of  Rights . .  22 

Pitt,  the  Earl  of  Chatham .  22 

Reform  bills  introduced  by  William  Pitt .  22 

Stanhope  and  Major  Cartwright .  23 

The  Whigs  and  aristocratic  clubs .  23 

Reform  bills  introduced  by  the  Duke  of  Richmond  and  Fox  .  .  .  23-4 

Society  for  Constitutional  Information .  24 

Government  coalition  in  1783 .  24 

Metamorphosis  caused  by  the  French  Revolution .  24 

The  Duke  of  Richmond’s  letter  on  equality .  25 

Burke's  Reflections  on  the  French  Revolution .  25 

Thomas  Paine’s  Rights  ot  Man  . .  26 

The  London  Corresponding  Society .  26 

Government  policy  of  oppression .  27 

Suspension  of  Habeas  Corpus  act  .  .  27 

Radicalism  revived  after  the  Napoleonic  war .  27 

The  Corn  Laws  of  1815 .  27 

William  Cobbett  and  the  Hampden  Clubs . 28-30 

Society  of  Spencean  Philanthropists .  31 

Riots  and  new  suspension  of  Habeas  Corpus  act .  31 

Benefit  Societies  and  Botanical  Meetings .  32 

The  Manchester  Massacre .  32 

The  struggle  for  freedom .  33 

The  Reform  Bill  and  the  National  Political  Union .  33 


CHAPTER  II 
The  Whig  Rule 


Hopes  inspired  by  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832 .  34 

Ricardo's  theory  of  rent . .  34 

n] 


11 


12 


CONTENTS 


[12 


Burden  of  taxes . 

Selfish  motives  of  manufacturers . 

Reform  Bill  condemned  by  “  Orator”  Hunt  and  others 

Lord  John  Russell,  the  hero  of  the  Reform  Bill . 

Thomas  Attwood  and  the  Birmingham  Political  Union. 

Political  corruption  and  inactivity . 

Notorious  Bedchamber  Plot . 

Old  Poor  Laws . 

Competition  between  workingmen  and  paupers . 

V_  New  Poor  Law  of  1834 . 

v.  The  “workhouse  test  ” . 

Poor  Law  Bastiles . 

Opposition  to  the  New  Poor  Law . 

Bill  passed  under  protest . 

Stringency  of  administration  . . 


CHAPTER  III 
The  New  Poor  Law 

Philosophy  of  the  new  law . 

Negligence  of  children  on  the  part  of  officers . 

Cruelties  perpetrated  in  workhouses . 

Lord  Brougham’s  frankness . 

Cobbett’s  opinion  of  the  new  law . 

Bronterre’s  tribute  to  the  “Money-monsters  ” . 

Feargus  O’Connor  on  excessive  use  of  machinery  .  .  . 

Brougham’s  hatred  of  charity . 

“  Stepping  stone  ”  to  total  abolition  of  relief . 

\  Carlyle’s  comments . 

Effects  disguised  for  some  time . 

V  The  Irish  famine .  . 

Distress  in  the  Highlands  and  Islands . 

Emigration  to  industrial  centres . 

Dwelling  conditions  in  cities . 


CHAPTER  IV 

The  Universal  Distress 

General  unemployment . 

Weavers  first  victims . . 

Birmingham  deputation . .  , 

Laissez  faire  policy . 


PAGE 

•  34-5 

•  34 

•  35 

•  36 

•  36-7 

•  37-9 

.  40 

.  40 

.  41-2 
.  42 

.  42 

.  42 

•  43-5 

•  45 
.  45-6 


•  47 

•  48 

.  49 

50 

50 

50-1 

51 
52-3 

53 

54-5 

55 

55 

55 

56 
57-8 


59-60 
.  60 

.  61 

61 


CONTENTS 


\j  FACHE 

\  Condition  in  agricultural  districts . 61-2 

‘  ‘ Not  the  time  ”  plea  against  repeal  of  Corn  Laws .  63 

Rise  of  prices  of  wheat .  63 

/  Distress  among  the  workingmen .  64 

Scourge  of  industrial  cities .  65 

Variation  of  mortality .  65 

Progress  of  crime . 66-7 

Proportion  of  commitments  to  population .  67 

Persons  in  receipt  of  outdoor  relief .  68 

Workhouse  inmates .  68 

Petitions  for  repeal  disregarded .  69 


CHAPTER  V 


Labor  Legislation  and  Trade  Unionism 

Whigs  hostile  towards  labor  legislation .  70 

Campaign  against  evils  of  factory  system  led  by  ultra-Tories  .  •  .  70-1 

Freedom  of  contract  and  laissez  faire  doctrine .  71 

Ten  Hour  Movement .  71 

Nassau  Senior’s  “last  hour”  argument .  72 

Government  reports .  72 

Ashley  and  his  followers .  73 

Employment  of  women  and  children . 73-4 

Attempts  at  trade  unionism  in  the  beginning  of  factory  system  .  .  75 

The  Six  Acts  of  1819 .  75 

Francis  Place  and  his  victory . 76-7 

New  stratagem  of  labor  leaders .  77 

Influence  of  Ricardian  socialists . .  .  77 

Owenism  and  Trade  Unionism .  78 

The  manufacturers  and  the  Government .  79 

Nassau  Senior’s  view  on  combinations  and  strikes .  79 

Grand  National  Consolidated  Trades’  Union  crushed .  80 

New  fight  for  freedom .  81 

Apotheosis  of  political  power .  81 

Bronterre’s  call  for  a  grand  national  movement .  82 


CHAPTER  VI 
The  People’s  Charter 

The  London  Working  Men’s  Association  and  its  objects . 84-5 

)L  Exclusiveness  of  the  Association .  86 

V  Source  of  social  evil .  87 

“The  Rotten  House  of  Commons’’ . 88-9 


14 


CONTENTS 


[14 


PAGE 


f 

"X 


Missionaries  on  tour .  89 

The  “  Six  Points  ” .  90 

Crown  and  Anchor  meeting .  90 

Roebuck  and  other  radical  members  of  Parliament . 90-1 

Committee  of  twelve .  91 

Prorogation  of  Parliament .  91 

Birmingham  Political  Union  enters  campaign .  92 

Correspondence  between  William  Lovett  and  Lord  John  Russell  .  92 

Address  to  Queen  Victoria .  93 

Address  to  American  workingmen .  94 

Preparation  of  bill  by  Lovett  and  Roebuck .  95 

Publication  of  “  People’s  Charter  ” .  .  95 

Address  on  principles  of  Charter . 95-7 


CHAPTER  VII 


The  Leaders 


V 


Most  auspicious  period . 

Two  parties  in  Chartist  ranks . 

Policy  of  moral  force . 

Advocates  of  physical  force  welcomed . 

Class  legislation  condemned . 

Discord  suppressed  for  a  time . 

William  Lovett  and  his  early  career . 

First  London  Cooperative  Trading  Association. 

Follower  of  Robert  Owen . 

Metropolitan  Political  Union . 

National  Union  of  the  working  classes . 

Founder  of  London  Working  Men’s  Association 

Personal  characteristics . 

Feargus  O’Connor’s  early  career . 

Quarrel  with  Daniel  O’Connell . 

Personal  characteristics . 

Opposed  to  Communism . 

Machinery  the  source  of  all  evil . 

Inclined  towards  revolutionary  policy . 

Founder  of  London  Democratic  Association  .  . 

Repudiated  terrorists . 

Bronterre’s  early  career . 

His  account  of  himself . 

Literary  activities . 

Admirer  of  Robespierre  and  Babeuf . 

Personal  characteristics . 


.  .  98 

.  .  98 

-  •  99 

.  .  100 
.  .  100 
.  .  101 
.  102 
.  102 
•  103 
■  *  103 

103- 4 
.  .  104 

104- 5 

•  •  105 
.  .  106 
.  107-8 
.  .  109 

.  .  IIO 
.  .  IIO 
IIO-III 
.  .  Ill 
.  .  1 12 
I 12-13 

•  •  H3 

•  ■  113 
.  •  114 


CONTENTS 


15 


15] 

% 

TK  •* 

His  view  on  the  franchise . 114 

Theory  of  nationalization  of  land . 115 

His  view  on  private  property . 117-118 

Failed  to  recognize  laws  of  social  evolution  and  role  of  the  working 

class . 1 19-120 

Thomas  Attwood  an  advocate  of  moral  force . 120 

Founder  of  Birmingham  Political  Union . 120 

Leader  of  Birmingham  Currency  School .  120 

Advocate  of  paper  money  and  inflation  of  currency . 120 

Henry  Hetherington,  martyr  for  free-press  cause . 121 

Poor  Man  s  Guardian  and  Twopenny  Despatch . 121 

Missionary  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association . 121 


CHAPTER  VIII 


The  Gospel  of  Revolt 

Lovett,  the  apostle  of  moral  force . 122 

O’Connor  and  Bronterre  yielded  to  the  inevitable . 123 

J.  R.  Stephens,  the  apostle  of  revolt . 123 

His  early  career . 123 

His  oratory .  124 

Preached  class  consciousness  and  urged  insurrection . 124 

Resistance  to  bad  laws  a  virtue . 125 

His  sermon  at  Newcastle . 126-7 

Opposition  to  the  New  Poor  Law . 129 

His  allegiance  to  the  Charter . 129 

Emphasized  economic  aspects  of  the  movement . 129 

Attitude  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association . 129 

His  warning  against  abortive  demonstrations . 130-2 

Lost  his  influence . 132 

C.  J.  Harney,  agitator  of  physical  force . 132 

Hailed  the  spirit  of  Marat . 133-4 

Henry  Vincent,  the  English  Demosthenes . 135 

His  early  career . 135 

Missionary  of  the  London  Working  Men's  Association . 135 

His  popularity . 135 

John  Frost  and  his  early  career  .  .  136 

His  imprisonment . 136 

Adherent  of  Cobbett . 137 

Advocate  of  municipal  reform . 137 

Member  of  Newport  town  council . 137 

Mayor  of  Newport . 137 


ifo  CONTENTS  [16 

PACK 

Appointed  borough  magistrate . 137 

Poor  Law  Guardian .  .  ...  137 

Member  of  Newport  Workingmen’s  Association . 137 

Chartist  leader . 137 

His  relations  with  people . 137 

CHAPTER  IX 
The  People 

State  of  ominous  excitement . 138 

Underground  societies . 138 

“  Foreign  Affairs  Committee”  at  Birmingham . 138 

Demonstration  at  Glasgow  . .  139 

Thomas  Attwood .  ...  139 

Suggestion  of  a  “  sacred  strike  ” . 139 

Provincial  Scotch  merchants  and  manufacturers .  139 

Newcastle  manifestation . 140 

Defiant  speeches . 140 

Feargus  O’Connor . 141 

Reference  to  Brougham . 141 

Appearance  of  troops  causes  indignation . 141 

Meetings  at  Sunderland  and  Northampton . 142 

Addresses  by  Vincent  and  others . 142 

Birmingham  demonstration . 142 

O’Connor  and  Attwood .  142 

Physical  force  notions  introduced . 142 

Resolutions  for  National  Petition  and  General  Convention  .  .  .  143 

Anxiety  among  leaders  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association  143 

Palace  Yard  demonstration  in  London . 143 

Allusions  to  physical  force . 144 

Birmingham  call  endorsed . 145 

Address  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association  to  the  Irish 

people . •  •  .  .  .  145 

Manchester  demonstration . 146 

Threats  of  vengeance .  146 

O’Connor,  Stephens  and  Fielden . 146-7 

Peep  Green  demonstration . 147 

Henry  Vincent  in  the  West . 147 

His  supremacy  in  Welsh  territory  . . 147 

Torch-light  processions . 148 

O’Connor,  Stephens  and  Harney  chief  speakers . 148 

People  making  arms . 149 

Stephens  at  the  Hyde  meeting . 149 


CONTENTS 


17 


17] 

FAGS 

Lord  John  Russell’s  letter  declaring  torch-light  meetings  ^illegal  .  149 

His  address  at  Liverpool . . . 149 

Royal  proclamation  trampled  under  foot . 150 

Chasm  between  workingmen  and  middle  class . 150 

Vincent  and  female  organizations . 150 

People  invoked  to  prepare  arms . ,  .  .  .  151 

Military  instructions . 151 

“  Science  of  killing”  extolled . 151 

Agitation  among  soldiers . 152 

CHAPTER  X 

The  Petition,  The  Convention  and  The  Government 

Proposals  emanated  from  the  moral  force  group . 153 

Equal  representation  omitted . 153 

Petition  lacking  in  vigor  of  expression  and  definiteness.  ....  153 

Influence  of  Thomas  Attwood . 153 

Generous  response  of  men  and  women . 154 

Opening  of  Convention . 154. 

Objects  of  Convention . 154-5 

Presentation  of  National  Petition  postponed  .  .  .  .  *  „ . 155 

Variety  of  problems  discussed . 156 

Addresses  on  the  general  distress  distributed  broadcast . 156 

First  collision  between  opposing  factions . 156 

Lovett  elected  secretary . 156 

Missionaries  of  the  Convention . 157 

The  London  Democratic  Association  and  Harney . 157 

Resolutions  submitted  to  Convention . 157 

“  Crown  and  Anchor  ”  meeting  cause  of  hostile  criticism . 158 

Resignation  of  three  Birmingham  delegates . 158-9 

The  “  million  of  men”  idea . 160 

Vincent’s  exhortations  to  be  prepared . 160 

Resolution  of  Convention  on  the  right  to  use  arms . 161 

Government  spies . 161 

Lord  Russell  and  John  Frost . 162 

Frost’s  defiant  letter . 162-4 

Open  hostility  between  the  Government  and  the  Chartists  ....  164 

Frost’s  name  struck  from  the  roll  of  magistrates . 165 

Indictment  of  Stephens . 165 

Convention  declared  an  illegal  body . 165 

Arrest  of  Vincent . 165 

National  Petition  and  Attwood . 165 

Convention  adjourned  to  Birmingham . 166 


1 8  CONTENTS  [jg 

PAGE 

Lord  Russell’s  letter  to  magistrates . 166 

The  Manifesto  of  the  Convention . 166-8 

Simultaneous  meetings  and  “  ulterior  measures  ’ 5 . 168-9 

Advocacy  of  terror  and  insurrection . 170 

London  police  in  Birmingham . 171 

Recommendations  of  the  Convention  to  the  simultaneous  meetings.  172 

Success  of  the  simultaneous  meetings . 172 

Reasons  for  the  removal  of  the  Convention  to  London . 173 

Resolutions  on  the  sacred  month  and  other  measures  adopted.  .  173-4 

CHAPTER  XI 
The  Wrestling  Forces 

The  Bull  Ring  attack  in  Birmingham . 175 

The  spirit  of  vengeance  and  terror . 176 

The  resolutions  of  the  General  Convention . 177 

The  arrest  of  Lovett  and  Collins . 177 

Prisoners  subjected  to  indignities . . . 178 

Proclamation  of  martial  law  and  wholesale  arrests . 178 

The  daily  meetings  at  Holloway  Head  and  other  places . 178 

The  Bull  Ring  riot  .  < . 178 

Public  meetings  and  resolutions . 179 

The  National  Petition  in  Parliament . 179 

Attwood’s  speech . 180 

Lord  Russell’s  reply . 180-2 

Disraeli’s  interpretation  of  the  Chartist  movement . 182 

The  division  on  Attwood’s  motion . 183 

The  effect  of  the  defeat  on  the  Convention . 183 

The  sacred  month  resolution  passed  and  rescinded . 183 

Bronterre’s  resolution  on  the  sacred  month . .  184 

The  recommendation  of  the  committee  of  five . 185 

The  national  holiday  a  complete  failure . 186 

The  dissolution  of  the  Convention  . 186 

Arrests  and  trials  for  sedition . 186 

The  theory  of  the  Attorney-General . 186 

The  trial  of  Lovett  and  Collins . 186 

The  resolution  of  the  Birmingham  Town  Council . 186 

The  jury . 187 

Sergeant  Goulburn’s  “  opportunity  ” . 187 

Lovett’s  address  to  the  jury . 187 

Comments  of  the  Morning  Chronicle  on  the  defence . 188 

Conviction  of  Lovett  and  Collins . 188 

Convictions  of  Stephens  and  other  Chartists . 189 


1 9]  CONTENTS  ig 

PAGE 

Public  meetings  and  demonstrations . 189 

Lovett  and  Collins  subjected  to  rigorous  discipline . 189 

Petitions  in  their  favor  . . 189 

Henry  Vincent  and  his  imprisonment . 190 

The  jury . 190 

Remonstrances  and  protests  by  Welsh  Chartists . 190 

The  Newport  Riot . 190 

CHAPTER  XII 
The  Newport  Riot 

The  role  of  Frost . 191 

The  plot  to  release  Vincent  by  force . 191 

The  plan  of  a  rising  in  Yorkshire  and  Lancashire . 191 

O’Connor’s  late  warning . 192 

Frost’s  last  public  letter . 192-4 

The  plan  of  the  Welsh  Chartists . . . 194-5 

Frost,  Williams  and  Jones  the  chief  commanders . 195-6 

Steps  taken  by  the  mayor . 197 

The  progress  of  the  rebels  impeded  by  bad  weather . 197 

The  fight  at  the  Westgate  Hotel . 197-8 

George  Shell’s  letter  to  his  parents . 199 

The  arrests  of  the  rebel  leaders . 199 

The  mayor  and  constables  rewarded . 200 

The  Chartist  Convention  in  London  and  the  defence  committees  .  200 

The  Special  Commission . 200 

The  trials  of  Frost,  Williams,  Jones  and  others . 201 

The  sentence  . 201 

The  decision  of  the  Court  of  Exchequer . 202 

The  anguish  of  the  Attorney  General . 203 

Death  sentence  commuted  to  transportation  for  life . 204 

Decoration  of  the  graves  of  the  Westgate*victims . 204 

Imprisonment  of  Bronterre,  O’Connor,  and  others . 205 

The  distribution  of  Chartist  prisoners . 205-6 

The  government  victory . 206 

The  new  recruits . 207 

Appendix  A 

Petition  agreed  to  at  the  “Crown  and  Anchor  ’’  meeting,  February 
28,  1837 . • . 208 

Appendix  B 

The  People’s  Charter . 213 


20 


CONTENTS 


[20 


PAGE 

Appendix  C 

The  National  Petition . 234 

Appendix  D 

Dialogue  on  war,  between  a  moral  force  Whig  and  a  Chartist,  by 
Bronterre . 239 

Index . 245 


CHAPTER  I 


Chartism  means  the  bitter  dis¬ 
content  grown  fierce  and  mad. 
...  It  is  a  new  name  for  a 
thing  which  has  had  many 
names,  which  will  yet  have 
many. — Carlyle. 

Prototypes  of  Chartism 

The  term  Chartism  was  coined  in  1837  to  designate  a  • 
set  of  principles  which  were  subsequently  embodied  in  the 
famous  “  People’s  Charter  ”.  Universal  suffrage,  equal 
representation,  annual  parliaments,  no  property  qualifica¬ 
tions,  vote  by  ballot,  and  payment  to  members  —  these 
formed  the  “  six  points  ”  which  for  a  number  of  years 
eclipsed  all  other  political  and  social  creeds.  At  its  inaugu¬ 
ration  the  movement  attracted  a  number  of  recruits  from 
the  ranks  of  the  middle  class.  In  time,  however,  Chartism 
became  ever  more  crystallized  as  a  distinct  labor  struggle 
for  the  reconstruction  of  society.  The  form  of  the  de¬ 
mands  were  purely  political,  but  the  object  was  strictly 
economic.  Political  equality  was  proclaimed  as  the  only 
weapon  to  secure  equality  of  condition  and  the  abolition  of 
class  privilege.  The  concomitant  social  equality  would 
then  pull  down  the  mountains  of  wealth  and  fill  up  the 
valleys  of  want.  The  task  could  be  effected  by  the  work¬ 
ingmen  only.  Cooperation  of  the  middle  class  was  gener¬ 
ally  tabooed  as  spelling  imminent  treason  and  danger  to  the 
people’s  cause.  It  was  this  expression  of  class  conscious¬ 
ness  and  realization  of  class  interests  that  distinguished 
Chartism  both  from  utopian  socialism  and  from  previous 
democratic  movements  in  England. 

Long  before  the  Chartist  demands  were  framed  in  the 
21]  21 


22 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[22 


People’s  Charter,  political  reform,  of  one  kind  or  another, 
had  been  urged  by  the  friends  of  the  people.  The  spirit  of 
democracy,  which  had  been  quelled  by  Cromwell’s  defeat 
of  the  Levellers,  revived  a  century  later.  Indeed,  some  of 
the  Chartist  “points”  were  promulgated  as  early  as  1769 
by  the  “  Society  of  the  Supporters  of  the  Bill  of  Rights,” 
which,  among  other  parliamentary  reforms,  demanded  equal 
representation  and  annual  parliaments.  Petitions  were  for 
the  first  time  presented  to  Parliament,  protesting  that  its 
members  were  not  self-representing  individuals,  but  trusted 
delegates  whose  authority  ceased  the  very  moment  they 
disregarded  the  wishes  and  interests  of  their  constituents. 
Pitt,  the  Earl  of  Chatham,  soon  pronounced  himself  a  con¬ 
vert  and  professed  that  “  the  constitution  intended  that 
there  should  be  a  permanent  relation  between  the  constit¬ 
uents  and  representative  body  of  the  people.”  On  the  first 
of  May,  1771,  he  asserted  that  “the  act  of  constituting  sep¬ 
tennial  parliaments  must  be  repealed.  .  .  .  Our  whole  con¬ 
stitution  is  giving  way,  and,  therefore,  with  the  most  delib¬ 
erate  and  solemn  conviction,  I  declare  myself  a  convert  to 
triennial  parliaments .”  1  His  son,  William  Pitt,  went  even 
further,  declaring  that  “  the  restoration  of  the  House  of 
Commons  to  freedom  and  independency,  by  the  interposition 
of  the  collective  body  of  the  nation,  was  essentially  necessary 

I  to  our  existence  as  a  free  people  that  an  equal  represen¬ 
tation  of  the  people  by  annual  elections  and  the  universal 
right  of  suffrage  appeared  to*  him  “  so  reasonable  to  the 
natural  feelings  of  mankind,  that  no  sophistry  could  elude 
the  force  of  the  arguments  which  were  urged  in  their  favor.” 
The  bills  which  he  introduced  in  1782,  1783  and  1785  pro¬ 
vided  for  the  extension  of  the  franchise  to  householders, 
and  for  the  gradual  extinction  of  all  rotten  boroughs. 

William  Pitt  was  far  from  being  an  extremist  among  his 

1  Chatham  Correspondence,  edited  by  W.  !S.  Taylor,  Esq.,  and  Cap¬ 
tain  John  Henry  Pringle,  London,  1840,  vol.  iv,  p.  174. 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


23 


23] 

colleagues.  The  writings  of  Stanhope  and  of  Major  John 
Cartwright  appeared  as  early  as  1774  and  1776,  respectively, 
and  demanded  universal  suffrage  as  a  natural  right.  In  his 
Legislative  Rights  of  the  Commonalty  Vindicated,  Cart¬ 
wright  argued  that  “  freedom  is  the  immediate  gift  of  God 
to  all  the  human  species,”  and  that  the  franchise  is  a  pre¬ 
requisite  of  freedom.  “  The  very  scavenger  in  the  streets 
has  a  better  right  to  his  vote  than  any  peer  to  his  coronet,  or 
the  king  himself  to  his  crown;  for  the  right  of  the  peer  and 
of  the  king  are  derived  from  the  laws  of  men,  but  the 
scavenger’s  from  the  laws  of  God  ”.  This  idea  became  so 
popular  that  the  Whigs  began  to  consider  it  advantageous 
to  identify  themselves  with  the  reformers.  Aristocratic 
clubs,  such  as  the  “  Constitutional  Society  ”,  the  “  Whig 
Club  ”,  and  the  “  Society  of  the  Friends  of  the  People  ”, 
vied  with  each  other  in  radicalism  and  in  their  emulation 
of  the  idealistic  maxims  of  Rousseau  and  the  French  En¬ 
cyclopedists.  In  1780  the  Duke  of  Richmond  introduced  a 
bill  for  universal  suffrage  and  annual  parliaments.  The 
preamble  contended  that  since  the  life,  liberty  and  property 
of  every  man  is  or  may  be  affected  by  the  law  of  the  land 
in  which  he  lives,  no  man  is,  or  can  be,  actually  represented 
if  he  has  no  vote  in  the  election  of  the  representative  whose 
consent  to  the  making  of  laws  binds  the  whole  community. 
The  state  of  election  of  members  of  the  House  of  Commons 
was  declared  as  a  gross  deviation  from  the  “  simple  and 
natural  principle  of  representation  and  equality.”  In  sev¬ 
eral  places  members  were  returned  by  the  property  of  one 
man  while  the  number  of  persons  who  were  suffered  to 
vote  did  not  amount  to  one-sixth  of  the  whole  community. 
The  great  majority  of  the  commoners  were  thus  governed 
by  laws  to  which  they  had  not  consented  either  by  them¬ 
selves  or  by  their  representatives.1  Triennial  and  septen- 

1  Compare  this  with  the  preamble  of  the  “  People's  Charter  ”.  See 
Appendix  B. 


24 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[24 

nial  Parliaments  were  described  as  tending  “  to  make  the 
representatives  less  dependent  on  their  constituents  than 
they  always  ought  to  be  The  same  year  Charles  James 
Fox,  the  Whig  leader  and  Chairman  of  the  Committee  of 
Westminster  Electors,  recommended  the  very  same  “  six 
points  ”  which  were  later  embodied  in  the  “  People’s  Cliar- 
*  ter  ”.  The  “  six  points  ”  were  also  urged  by  the  “  Society 
for  Constitutional  Information  ”,  which  included  among  its 
leaders  a  number  of  the  most  distinguished  members  of  the 
English  nobility,  such  as  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  the  Duke 
of  Bedford,  the  Earl  of  Derby,  the  Earl  of  Effingham,  the 
Earl  of  Selkirk,  Lord  Mountnorris,  and  others. 

The  bright  prospects  of  Major  Cartwright  and  his  adher¬ 
ents,  however,  soon  came  to  an  end.  The  germs  of  radical 
ideas,  which  had  infected  the  nobility,  began  to  spread  also 
among  the  lower  strata.  The  alarmed  government  found 
itself  in  a  lurch,  and  its  peace  of  mind  had  to  be  bought  at 
the  price  of  coalition  in  1783  between  Lord  North,  the 
|  representative  of  the  government,  and  Mr.  Fox,  the  spokes¬ 
man  of  the  Whigs.  This  coalition  brought  about  a  com- 

Iplete  metamorphosis  in  the  attitude  of  the  Whigs,  which  be¬ 
came  the  more  intense  during  the  French  Revolution.  A 
feeling  of  abhorrence  swayed  the  professed  reformers 
against  all  societies  which  were  suspected  of  revolutionary 
ideas.  All  attempts  at  parliamentary  reform  were  doomed 
to  crushing  defeat.  The  former  illustrious  advocate  of  re¬ 
form,  Edmund  Burke,  agreed  in  this  matter  with  his  rival 
Pitt.  In  his  great  zeal  he  stigmatized  the  people  as  a 
“  swinish  multitude  ”,  and  led  the  Whigs  in  their  support  of 
the  government  policy  of  oppression. 

The  adhesion  to  the  government  on  the  part  of  the  aris¬ 
tocracy  was  the  natural  reaction  of  their  optimistic  ideal¬ 
ism  which  evaporated  when  brought  under  pressure  of  active 
life.  They  had  believed  that  the  doctrine  of  “  natural,  un- 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


25 


25] 

alienable  and  equal  rights  ”  could  be  disseminated  among 
the  people  with  perfect  safety  to  their  own  class  and  tradi¬ 
tions.  Some  even  went  so  far  as  to  contend  that  “equality” 
was  a  safeguard  against  “levellers”.  This  view  was  eluci¬ 
dated  by  the  Duke  of  Richmond  in  the  following  extract  of 
his  letter  to  Lieutenant-Colonel  Sharman: 

Another  subject  of  apprehension  is  that  the  principle  of  al¬ 
lowing  to  every  man  an  equal  right  to  vote  tends  to  equality 
in  other  respects,  and  to  level  property .  To  me  it  seems  to 
have  a  direct  contrary  tendency.  The  equal  rights  of  men  to 
security  from  oppression,  and  to  the  enjoyments  of  life  and 
liberty,  strike  me  as  perfectly  compatible  with  their  unequal 
shares  of  industry,  labor  and  genius,  which  are  the  origin  of 
inequality  of  fortunes.  The  equality  and  inequality  of  men 
are  both  founded  in  nature;  and  whilst  we  do  not  confound 
the  two,  and  only  support  her  establishments,  we  can  not  err. 
The  protection  of  property  appears  to  me  one  of  the  most 
essential  ends  of  society;  and  so  far  from  injuring  it  by  this 
plan,  I  conceive  it  to  be  the  only  means  of  preserving  it;  for 
the  present  system  is  hastening  with  great  strides  to  a  perfect 
equality  in  universal  poverty A 

The  French  Revolution  led  some  of  the  English  aristoc¬ 
racy  to  realize  that  abstract  ideas  of  equality  and  natural 
rights  meant  absolutely  nothing  to  the  common  people,  un¬ 
less  they  went  hand  in  hand  with  concrete  equality  in  dis¬ 
tribution  of  wealth.  Moreover,  they  learned  that  the  ab¬ 
stract  idea  of  natural  rights  was  the  treacherous  snake  that 
goaded  on  the  people  to  demand  concrete  equality,  and  they 
determined  to  avert  this  at  any  cost.  Burke’s  Reflections 
on  the  French  Revolution,  published  in  1790,  preached  a 
crusade  against  Republican  France,  as  well  as  against 
French  principles  in  England.  The  Reflections  exerted  a 

1  The  Right  of  the  People  to  Universal  Suffrage  and  Annual  Parlia¬ 
ments,  August  15,  1783  (published  in  London,  1817). 


26 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[26 

deep  influence  on  the  men  in  power,  but  at  the  same  time 
gave  an  impetus  to  the  counter  activities  of  the  radicals. 
The  Rights  of  Man  by  Thomas  Paine,  the  exact  antithesis 
of  the  Reflections ,  gained  a  wide  circulation  among  the 
middle  and  lower  classes.  The  arduous  task  of  reform  was 
taken  up  by  the  “  London  Corresponding  Society  ”,  which 
was  founded  by  Thomas  Hardy,  a  shoemaker.  Counting 
but  four  members  at  its  inauguration,  the  first  meeting  in 
1792  was  attended  by  nine  individuals,  all  personally  ac¬ 
quainted  with  each  other.  Encouraged  by  the  endorsement 
of  the  Duke  of  Richmond,  the  Society  jealously  began  to 
spread  its  tenets  all  over  the  United  Kingdom  and,  within 
a  short  period,  attained  importance  and  celebrity  as  one  of 
the  largest  radical  organizations.  The  government,  in  its 
alarm,  was  led  to  believe  that  “  there  were  evil-minded  per¬ 
sons  in  the  country,  who,  acting  in  concert  with  other  per¬ 
sons  in  France,  designed  to  overturn  our  happy  constitu¬ 
tion,  and  introduce  a  system  of  bloodshed  and  plunder.” 
The  war  with  France  in  1793  was  primarily  a  war  against 
Jacobinism,®  and  Pitt,  who  was  always  seeing  visions  of 
“  thousands  of  bandits  ”,  was  logically  compelled  to  combat 
the  foe  within  the  country.  Numerous  spies  were  employed 
to  shadow  the  steps  of  every  suspicious  person,  and  on  the 
testimony  of  these  spies,  many  were  subjected  to  severe 
penalties.  A  certain  Mr.  Frost,  an  attorney,  was  sentenced 
to  six  months’  imprisonment,  to  stand  in  the  pillory  and  be 
struck  off  the  roll,  because  he  had  dared  once  in  a  coffee¬ 
house  to  declare  himself  “  for  equality  and  no  king  ”.  A 
well-known  Mr.  Ridgway  was  sentenced  to  four  years’  im¬ 
prisonment  and  £200  fine  for  selling  Thomas  Paine’s  Rights 
of  Man.  The  former  friends  of  the  “  London  Correspond¬ 
ing  Society”  began  to  see  treason  in  its  activities.  Two  dele¬ 
gates  sent  by  this  society  to  Scotland  in  1793  were  arrested, 
tried,  convicted,  and  transported  for  fourteen  years.  In  its 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


27 


27] 

report  of  1794,  the  Secret  Committee  of  the  House  of  Com¬ 
mons  claimed  to  have  discovered  seditious  practices.  It  was 
this  report  that  was  chiefly  responsible  for  the  suspension  of 
the  habeas  corpus  act.1  Pitt  declared  the  matter  urgent,  and 
the  bill  was  passed  at  a  special  sitting  the  next  day  after  its 
introduction  by  the  government.  Fox  openly  accused  the 
ministers  of  a  design  to  terrorize  the  people  in  order  to 
shield  themselves  from  the  condemnation  for  involving  the 
country  in  a  disastrous  war.  The  government  became  in¬ 
exorable  in  its  oppression  of  associations,  as  well  as  of 
individuals.  Reform  bills  were  introduced  only  to  encoun¬ 
ter  ignominious  defeat.  All  reform  societies  were  dis¬ 
banded,  all  public  meetings  prohibited,  and  reformers  were 
rendered  innocuous  either  through  imprisonment  or  intimi¬ 
dation.  For  nearly  two  decades  the  English  people  lived, 
as  it  were,  in  a  state  of  internal  siege. 

Radicalism  had  been  crushed  to  revive  again,  however, 
with  much  greater  force,  after  the  war  cloud,  which  hovered 
over  Europe  for  almost  a  quarter  of  a  century,  was  dis¬ 
persed  at  Waterloo.  The  war  made  England  a  world- 
monopolist.  Foreign  manufacturers,  writhing  under  the 
sword  of  Damocles  in  their  own  countries,  invested  their 
capital  in  England  which  alone  was  safe  from  foreign  in¬ 
vasion.  By  virtue  of  the  complete  monopoly  of  Great 
Britain  as  a  water-carrier,  English  trade  was  carried  on 
in  the  remotest  parts  of  the  world.  All  this  changed  with 
the  end  of  the  Napoleonic  career.  The  demand  for  English 
manufactures  suddenly  shrank,  capital  was  withdrawn,  and 
labor  thrown  out  of  employment.  The  disbanded  militia 
and  discharged  sailors  greatly  swelled  the  ranks  of  the  un¬ 
employed.  Symptoms  of  discontent  which  were  local  in 
the  beginning,  soon  became  universal  and  burst  into  violence 
after  the  passage  of  the  Corn  Laws  in  1815.  Owing  to  the 

1  Cf.  Address  to  the  Nation  of  1797  by  the  “  London  Corresponding 
Society,”  in  the  English  Chartist  Circular ,  vol.  ii,  no.  54. 


28  THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [28 

failure  of  the  harvest  and  the  high  import  duties,  the  price 
of  wheat  during  1816  rose  from  52s.  iod.  to  103s.  yd.,  and 
jumped  still  higher  during  the  first  months  of  1817.1  To 
urban  riots,  many  of  which  were  not  suppressed  without 
bloodshed,  and  to  machine-breaking  were  added  peasant  in¬ 
surrections  and  incendiarism.  Flags  were  hoisted  with 
ominous  mottoes,  like  “Bread  or  Blood”;  “Willing  to 
work,  but  none  of  us  to  beg  The  distress  assumed 
threatening  proportions.  The  attention  of  Parliament  was 
called  to  the  fact  that  whole  parishes  had  been  deserted, 
and  the  crowd  of  paupers,  increasing  in  numbers  as  they 
went  from  parish  to  parish,  spread  wider  and  wider  this 
awful  desolation. 

The  failure  on  the  part  of  the  House  of  Commons  to 
alleviate  the  condition  of  the  distressed  revived  the  feeling 
of  hostility  towards  the  government,  and  political  agitators 
soon  emerged  from  obscurity.  Parliamentary  reform  was 
again  urged  as  the  panacea  for  all  social  evils.  But  this 
time  the  demand  emanated  from  a  group  of  men  entirely  dif¬ 
ferent  from  their  predecessors,  the  reformers  of  the  eight¬ 
eenth  century.  They  came  not  from  the  ranks  of  aristo¬ 
cracy  and  they  appealed  not  to  aristocracy.  They  were 
humble  writers  of  “  two-penny  trash  ”,  and  their  writings 
were  intended  for  the  still  humbler  workingmen.  The  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  radical  clubs  of  the  eighteenth  century,  as  Burke 
aptly  argued  against  them,  conceived  reform  not  as  a  means 
of  expediency  and  necessity,  but  as  a  means  of  advancing 
justice.  The  later  reformers  cared  very  little  for  abstract 
ideas ;  they  demanded  political  equality  as  a  necessary 
weapon  in  the  daily  struggle  for  existence  of  the  lower 
classes,  and  their  Hampden  Clubs  became  the  haunts  of 
courageous  men.  The  writings  of  William  Cobbett 2  be- 

1  Cf.  Thomas  Tooke,  History  of  Prices  and  of  the  State  of  the  Cir- 
rulation  from  1793  to  1837,  vol.  i,  London,  1838,  p.  390. 

2  William  Cobbett  (1762-1835),  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  bril- 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


29 


29] 

came  the  New  Testament  in  almost  every  cottage  in  the 
manufacturing  districts.  According  to  his  contemporaries, 
Cobbett’s  Political  Register  was  read  at  “  meetings  of 
people  in  many  towns,  and  one  copy  was  thus  made  to 
convey  the  information  to  scores  of  persons.” 

liant  journalists  of  the  first  half  of  the  nineteenth  century  and  one  of 
the  most  remarkable  personalities,  was  a  descendant  of  a  humble  family 
and  the  son  of  a  laborer,  who  came  to  have  “  laborers  under  him.”  He 
could  not  remember  the  time  when  he  did  not  earn  his  own  living.  In 
1783  he  established  himself  as  an  attorney’s  clerk,  but  before  long  the 
erratic  lad  began  to  feel  himself  shackled  by  the  routine  and  drudgery 
of  his  office.  He  enlisted  in  the  54th  Foot,  and  sailed  to  America, 
where  he  stayed  with  his  regiment  for  seven  years.  After  his  discharge 
he  went  for  a  short  time  to  England.  There  he  accused  three  of  his 
former  officers  of  fraud,  was  courtmartialed  and  fled  back  to  America. 
He  settled  in  Philadelphia,  where  he  maintained  himself  and  his  wife  by 
teaching  English  to  French  immigrants.  He  founded  a  daily  paper, 
which  he  styled  the  Porcupine  Gazette,  and  wrote  abusive  articles 
under  the  pseudonym  of  “  Peter  Porcupine.”  He  bitterly  attacked  the 
American  Republic  and  the  most  popular  men  of  the  country.  His 
journal  soon  brought  him  into  trouble  and  he  fled  again,  this  time  to  his 
native  country,  in  order  to  escape  the  payment  of  a  penalty  of  5,000 
dollars  for  libel.  In  England  he  was  welcomed  by  the  Tories,  and 
with  their  aid  published  at  first  the  Porcupine  and,  then,  in  1802,  the 
Register,  which  led  a  guerilla  warfare  with  the  pillars  of  society,  and 
which  before  long  obtained  the  most  powerful  influence  all  over  the 
country.  The  Tories  became  indignant  with  his  behavior  and  waited 
for  an  opportunity  to  get  square  with  their  former  protege.  For  his 
severe  attack  on  the  government  for  employing  German  soldiers  to 
flog  English  troops  who  participated  in  a  mutiny,  he  was  indicted  for 
libel,  sentenced  to  two  years’  imprisonment  and  fined  £2,000.  This 
sentence  taught  Cobbett  a  useful  lesson  of  which  he  availed  him¬ 
self  after  his  release :  he  learned  how  to  advocate  reforms  without 
giving  the  government  prosecutor  a  probable  chance  of  success.  From 
prison  he  emerged  an  extreme  Radical  and  Revolutionist.  He  earn¬ 
estly  believed  that  the  social  evils  would  be  remedied  by  political  re¬ 
forms  and  stopped  short  of  nothing  that  aimed  at  the  attainment  of 
these  reforms.  As  a  member  of  Parliament,  to  which  he  was  elected 
in  1830,  he  attacked  the  New  Poor  Law,  and,  with  the  exception  of  a 
few  eccentricities  which  he  displayed,  as,  for  example,  his  prejudice 
against  the  Jews  and  his  opposition  to  the  Anti-Slavery  movement,  he 
remained  till  the  last,  as  Southey  called  him,  “  an  Evangelist  of  the 
populace.” 


30 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[30 

In  justice  to  Cobbett,  it  must  be  said  that  originally  his 
idea  was  to  make  the  people  realize  the  want  of  reform 
and  to  offer  constitutional  guidance,  “  combined  with  firm¬ 
ness  and  temper.”  He  hoped  to  inspire  the  masses  “  with 
patience  and  fortitude  ”  and  avert  their  sporadic  outbursts 
of  violence  and  machine-breaking.  As  to  the  Hampden 
Clubs,  they  had  great  faith  in  “  the  noblemen  and  gentle¬ 
men  ”  of  whom  they  were  composed,  and  in  the  several  hun¬ 
dred  petitions  to  Parliament,  asserting  that  in  such  wise 
they  will  “  insure  a  redress  of  that  intolerable  grievance, 
taxation  without  representation,  which  has  been  the  true 
cause  of  that  universal  distress  which  the  nation  now 
suffers.”  1 

The  government,  however,  felt  great  apprehension  at  the 
activities  of  the  clubs.  Their  perfect  organization  was  in 
itself  something  which  could  not  be  overlooked.  The  House 
of  Commons  had  great  cause  to  be  alarmed  at  the  report  of 
its  Secret  Committee  of  the  19th  of  February,  1817,  which 
portrayed  the  Hampden  Clubs  as  disseminators  of  rebellion : 

It  appears  to  be  part  of  the  system  of  these  clubs  to  pro¬ 
mote  an  extension  of  clubs  of  the  same  name  and  nature,  so 
widely  as,  if  possible,  to  include  every  village  in  the  kingdom. 
The  leading  members  are  active  in  the  circulation  of  publica¬ 
tions  likely  to  promote  their  object.  Petitions,  ready  pre¬ 
pared,  have  been  sent  down  from  the  metropolis  to  all  so¬ 
cieties  in  the  country  disposed  to  receive  them.  The  com¬ 
munication  between  the  clubs  takes  place  by  the  mission  of 
delegates;  delegates  from  these  clubs  in  the  country  have 
assembled  in  London,  and  are  expected  to  assemble  again 
early  in  March.  Whatever  may  be  the  real  objects  of  these 
clubs  in  general,  your  Committee  have  no  hesitation  in  stating, 
from  information  on  which  they  place  full  reliance,  that  in  far 

1  See  the  Political  Register  of  Dec.  21,  1816;  the  Full  Report  of  the 
Proceedings  of  the  meeting,  convened  by  the  Hampden  Clubs  .  .  .  on 
Saturday,  the  15th  of  June,  1816 ;  also  Samuel  Bamford,  Passages  in 
the  Life  of  a  Radical,  London,  1844,  vol.  i. 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


31 


3l] 

the  greater  number  of  them,  and  particularly  in  those  which 
are  established  in  the  great  manufacturing  districts  of  Lan¬ 
cashire,  Leicestershire,  Nottinghamshire,  and  Derbyshire,  and 
which  are  composed  of  the  lower  order  of  artisans,  nothing 
short  of  a  Revolution  is  the  object  expected  and  avowed. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  the  Hampden  Clubs  were 
rather  conservative  in  their  demands  and  moderate  in  lan¬ 
guage  in  comparison  with  the  “Society  of  Spencean  Philan¬ 
thropists,”  which  was  instituted  in  1816  for  the  discussion 
of  “  subjects  calculated  to  enlighten  the  human  understand¬ 
ing.”  Besides  their  opposition  to  machinery  and  their  doc¬ 
trine  of  communism  in  land,  these  “  Philanthropists  ”  en¬ 
deavored  to  “  enlighten  ”  the  people  that  “  it  was  an  easy 
matter  to  upset  government,  if  handled  in  a  proper  manner.” 

History  repeated  itself.  To  paraphrase  the  “  Declara¬ 
tion  ”  of  the  Hampden  Club,  the  want  of  reform  made  the 
people  feel,  and  misery  made  them  speak.  Meetings  of 
protest  against  the  government  and  the  notorious  riot  at 
Spa  Fields  brought  about  the  new  suspension  of  the  habeas 
corpus  act.  As  to  what  this  meant,  the  following  lines 
of  Samuel  Bamford  may  bear  witness : 

The  proscriptions,  imprisonments,  trials  and  banishments  of 
1792  were  brought  to  our  recollections  by  the  similarity  of  our 
situation  to  those  of  the  sufferers  of  that  period.  It  seemed 
as  if  the  sun  of  freedom  were  gone  down  and  a  rayless  expanse 
of  oppression  had  finally  closed  over  us.  Cobbett,  in  terror 
of  imprisonment  had  fled  to  America  ;  Sir  Francis  Burdett  had 
enough  to  do  in  keeping  his  own  arms  free ;  Lord  Cochrane 
was  threatened,  but  quailed  not.  Hunt  was  still  somewhat 
turbulent,  but  he  was  powerless.  .  .  .  Our  Society  became 
divided  and  dismayed ;  hundreds  slunk  home  to  their  looms, 
nor  cared  to  come  out,  save  like  owls  at  nightfall,  when  they 
would  perhaps  steal  through  bye-paths  or  behind  hedges, 
or  down  some  dough,  to  hear  the  news  at  the  next  cottage.1 


1  Samuel  Bamford,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  44. 


32 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[32 

The  suspension  of  open  meetings  was  followed  by  the 
formation  of  various  secret  societies  aiming  at  reforms 
which  again  were  almost  identical  with  those  for  which 
the  Chartists  subsequently  fought  on  penalty  of  imprison¬ 
ment  or  transportation.  “  Benefit  Societies  ”,  “  Botanical 
Meetings  ”,  and  similar  ostensibly  innocent  associations 
called  for  revolution  as  the  only  means  for  redress.  The 
suffering  masses  were  assured  that  reform  would  produce 
economy  and  consequently  diminish  taxation,  which,  in  its 
turn,  would  enable  the  workingman  to  increase  his  home 
consumption.  Taxation  without  representation  again,  as  a 
few  decades  before,  was  denounced  as  the  root  of  all  evil. 
All  petitions  for  reform  were,  as  ever,  rejected  by  the  gov¬ 
ernment.  The  wrath  of  the  people,  which  for  some  time 
had  been  smoldering  under  the  cover  of  secret  meetings, 
finally  broke  out  in  1819  in  a  series  of  defiant  public  demon¬ 
strations  at  Birmingham,  Leeds,  Stockport,  Smithfield,  and 
other  manufacturing  districts,  and  culminated  in  the  Man¬ 
chester  Massacre  of  August  16,  1819.  A  large  demonstra¬ 
tion,  estimated  at  about  eighty  thousand  persons,  was  indis¬ 
criminately  attacked  by  military  forces.  Unable  to  pene¬ 
trate  the  compact  mass  of  human  beings,  the  cavalry  plied 
their  sabres  to  clear  a  way  for  the  yeomanry,  who  dashed, 
wherever  there  was  an  opening,  pressing,  trampling  and 
wounding  hundreds  of  men,  women  and  children.  The 
massacre  precipitated  bitter  protests  from  all  over  the  land. 
The  authorities  tried  in  vain  to  minimize  the  real  signifi¬ 
cance  of  the  outrage  by  declaring  it  a  mere  accident.  The 
working  class  was  overwhelmed  with  the  feelings  of  re¬ 
sentment  and  of  revenge,  which  were  admirably  voiced  by 
Shelley  in  his  “  Mask  of  Anarchy  ”  : 

“  And  at  length  when  ye  complain 
With  a  murmur  weak  and  vain, 

’Tis  to  see  the  Tyrant's  crew 
Ride  over  your  wives  and  you — 

Blood  is  on  the  grass  like  dew. 


33] 


PROTOTYPES  OF  CHARTISM 


33 


Then  it  is  to  feel  revenge 

Fiercely  thirsting  to  exchange 

Blood  for  blood — and  wrong  for  wrong — 

Do  not  thus  when  ye  are  strong.” 

Protests  passed  into  action.  The  agitators  declared  the 
Kingdom  in  a  state  of  Civil  War.  The  general  disaffection 
was  attributed  directly  to  the  irritation  of  want  and  eco¬ 
nomic  injustice.1  Revolt  and  anarchy  reigned  supreme  in 
all  manufacturing  districts.  The  agitator  Thistlewood 
found  many  adherents  to  his  plan  to  overthrow  the  govern¬ 
ment.  Executions  for  high  treason  became  common  events. 
But  nothing  could  curb  the  awakened  slave,  who,  together 
with  Shelley,  felt  that  his  very  life  depended  on  “Freedom’ ' : 

“  Thou  art  clothes,  and  fire,  and  food 
For  the  trampled  multitude — 

No — in  countries  that  are  free 
Such  starvation  cannot  be, 

As  in  England  now  we  see.” 

The  workingmen  were  taught  and  led  to  fight  for 
“  clothes,  and  fire,  and  food  ”,  and  to  consecrate  their  very 
lives  to  the  cause  of  freedom,  which  they  confounded  with 
universal  suffrage.  Mis-government  was  considered  the 
source  of  all  social  evils,  and  the  control  of  Parliament  was, 
therefore,  looked  to  as  the  only  remedy  by  which  the  whole 
world  might  be  relieved.  The  French  Revolution  of  1830 
gave  a  fresh  impetus  to  the  popular  discontent.  The  middle 
classes  promptly  seized  this  opportunity  to  enroll  the  sup¬ 
port  of  the  National  Political  Unions  of  workingmen  to 
their  Reform  Bill.  After  the  passage  of  the  Reform  Act 
of  1832  the  political  agitation  subsided  for  a  few  years 
only  to  assume  a  more  formidable  aspect  in  the  Chartist 
Movement. 

1  See  Gracchus,  Letter  to  Lord  Sidmouth  on  the  Recent  Disturbances 
at  Manchester,  London,  1819. 


CHAPTER  II 


The  Whig  Rule 

IThe  fourth  decade  of  the  nineteenth  century  was  a  period 
of  trial  for  the  English  nation  and  brought  a  series  of  bitter 
disappointments  to  its  lower  strata.  To  begin  with,  the  poli¬ 
tical  machinery  of  the  Whig  rule,  which  at  its  inauguration 
had  inspired  great  hopes,  soon  fell  into  a  state  of  stagnation 
and  absolute  incompetence.  The  people,  who  at  the  beginning 
of  the  decade  were  all  exalted  with  aspirations  for  social 
justice,  for  equality  and  fraternity,  saw  themselves  de¬ 
serted  and  their  cause  betrayed  by  their  standardbearers. 
The  honeyed  promises  of  the  middle  class,  made  through 
their  representatives  in  the  beginning  of  the  thirties,  were 
but  the  baits  of  politicians  who  turned  recreant  upon  the 
achievement  of  their  object.  It  became  evident  that  their 
aim  had  been  simply  to  wrest  the  power  from  the  landed  aris¬ 
tocracy,  and  to  further  their  own  interests.  Their  craving 
for  political  power  was  in  accord  with  the  economic  doctrine 
of  rent,  which  was  promulgated  by  Ricardo,  the  first  mouth¬ 
piece  of  the  capitalist  class.  According  to  this  doctrine, 
rent  is  a  transfer  of  wealth  from  the  capitalist  to  the  land¬ 
lord  ;  rent  and  profit  fluctuate,  therefore,  on  opposite  scales, 
— the  rise  in  the  former  necessarily  causing  a  fall  in  the 
latter.  The  scales  were  controlled  by  the  landlords,  and  it 
became  a  matter  of  prime  importance  to  reverse  this  control. 
The  Corn  Laws  were  a  thorn  in  the  side  of  the  manufac¬ 
turers,  and  all  taxes  were  attacked  as  a  baneful  burden  on 
industry.  Sydney  Smith  gave  expression  to  this  sentiment 
in  his  characteristic  style: 

34 


[34 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


35 


35] 

The  schoolboy  whips  his  taxed  top,  the  beardless  youth  man¬ 
ages  his  taxed  horse  with  a  taxed  bridle  on  a  taxed  road,  and 
the  dying  Englishman,  pouring  his  medicine  which  has  paid 
7  per  cent  into  a  spoon  that  has  paid  15  per  cent,  flings  him¬ 
self  back  upon  his  chintz  bed  which  has  paid  22  per  cent,  makes 
his  will  on  an  £8  stamp,  and  expires  in  the  arms  of  an  apothe¬ 
cary  who  has  paid  a  license  of  £100  for  the  privilege  of  putting 
him  to  death.  His  whole  property  is  then  immediately  taxed 
from  2  to  10  per  cent.  Besides  the  probate,  large  fees  are  de¬ 
manded  for  burying  him  in  the  chancel.  His  virtues  are  handed 
down  to  posterity  on  taxed  marble,  and  he  will  then  be  gath¬ 
ered  to  his  fathers  to  be  taxed  no  more. 

There  were,  indeed,  few  who  during  the  fight  for  the 
Reform  Bill  realized  that  the  interest  of  the  manufacturers 
in  the  reform  movement  was  actuated  by  selfish  motives. 
The  organ  of  the  radical  group  of  the  working  class,  the 
Poor  Man's  Guardian,  had  on  various  occasions,  in  1831  and 
1832,  warned  the  laborers  that  “  the  bill  will  only  increase 
the  influence  of  landholders,  merchants,  manufacturers  and 
tradesmen  ”,  and  that  it  was  the  “  most  tyrannical,  the  most 
infamous,  the  most  hellish  measure,”  as  the  poor  “  will  be 
starved  to  death  by  thousands  if  this  bill  pass,  and  thrown 
on  to  the  dunghill,  or  on  to  the  ground,  naked  like  dogs.”  1 
The  national  Union  of  the  Working  Classes  denounced  the 
bill  as  a  mere  expedient  “  to  deceive  the  people,  and  no  ways 
calculated  to  better  the  condition  of  the  working  people.” 
“  Orator  ”  Hunt 2  was  even  more  emphatic  in  his  condemna- 

1  See  “Last  Warning  on  the  Accursed  Reform  Bill,”  in  the  Poor 
Man's  Guardian,  April  11,  1832. 

2  “Orator”  Henry  Hunt  (1773-1835),  at  one  time  the  friend  of  Cob- 
bett  and  a  member  for  Preston,  was  a  Somersetshire  gentleman  and  a 
liveryman  of  London.  In  his  youth  he  was  committed  to  the  King’s 
Bench  Prison  for  six  weeks  as  a  penalty  for  a  duel  which  he  had  fought 
with  Lord  Bruce.  In  prison  the  young  Tory  came  in  contact  with 
some  discontented  persons  and  listened  to  a  great  deal  of  inflammatory 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


tion  of  the  bill,  root  and  branch,  as  an  instrument  of  restric¬ 
tion  and  as  an  attack  on  the  poor.  But  Hunt  was  de¬ 
nounced  as  a  “  demagogue  ”  and  “  egotist  ”,  while  Lord 
John  Russell,  the  hero  of  the  Reform  Bill,  was  almost  uni¬ 
versally  applauded  for  his  speech  in  favor  of  the  bill.  He 
showed  the  absurdity  and  the  crying  injustice  of  the  system 
of  election  which  had  prevailed  in  England  and  which  had 
allowed  a  “  green  mound  ”  or  a  “  stone  wall,  with  three 
niches  in  it  ”,  to  send  two  members  to  Parliament,  while 
large  flourishing  towns,  full  of  trade  and  activity,  contain¬ 
ing  vast  magazines  of  wealth  and  manufactures  had  no 
representation.1  The  sympathies  of  the  masses  were  de¬ 
cidedly  in  favor  of  the  bill.  With  the  exception  of  a  small 
radical  faction,  the  workingmen  rallied  round  Thomas  Att- 
wood,  the  leader  of  the  Birmingham  Political  Union,  who, 
according  to  Francis  Place,2  was  then  regarded  “  the  most 
influential  man  in  England  ”,  and  who  was  credited  with 
having  worked  the  hardest  to  carry  the  Reform  Bill. 

The  secret,  however,  soon  leaked  out  that  the  working 
class  had  been  hoodwinked.  Before  long  the  Whig  leaders 
began  to  speak  of  their  old  popular  allies,  “  the  Birming¬ 
ham  fellows  ”,  with  affected  indifference  and  open  hostility. 
They  hated  to  be  reminded  of  the  National  Political  Union, 

talk,  which  decided  his  future  activities,  and  he  emerged  a  thorough  rad¬ 
ical.  He  was  “  the  best  mob  orator  of  the  day,  as  Francis  Place  puts  it, 
and  his  uncompromising  views  and  actions  gained  him  the  name  of 
“demagogue”  from  his  opponents,  on  the  one  hand,  and  of  “champion 
of  liberty”  from  the  lower  classes,  on  the  other.  He  played  an  im¬ 
portant  role  in  the  riots  of  1816,  and  was  usually  referred  to  as  the 
hero  of  Spa  Fields  and  the  Peterloo  Massacre.  His  gigantic  figure 
and  carriage,  as  well  as  his  histrionic  manner  of  talking,  rendered  him 
an  idol  of  the  masses,  and,  while  hated  by  the  well-to-do  people,  he 
found  solace  in  the  love  and  devotion  of  the  oppressed  and  poor. 

1  Cf.  Lord  John  Russell’s  speech  of  the  ist  of  March,  1831,  in  Han¬ 
sard’s  Parliamentary  Debates,  third  series,  vol.  ii,  pp.  1061-1089. 

2  Cf.  infra,  p.  76. 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


3  7 


37] 

which  had  elevated  them  into  power.  Lord  Melbourne 
confessed  his  strong  opposition  to  “  any  radical  measure 
or  radical  colleagues  'V  The  treachery  on  the  part  of  the 
Whigs  was  the  more  revolting  because  of  the  false  expec¬ 
tations  they  had  raised : 

It  is  painful,  at  this  day, — testifies  a  contemporary  reformer — 
to  look  back  upon  the  delirium  of  joy  which  followed  the  suc¬ 
cess  of  this  effort  for  real  representation.  That  long,  loud, 
universal  shout  of  gladness  which  shook  the  earth  and  rose 
up  to  heaven,  gave  testimony  to  the  hold  which  the  idea  had 
taken  of  the  nation’s  heart.  Wisely  was  it  concealed  from 
them  at  that  moment  of  excitement,  that  they  had  scotched  the 
snake  only,  not  killed.2 

The  protest  against  the  Act  of  1832  was  spontaneous  on 
the  part  of  real  reformers.  It  was  assailed  for  having 
opened  up  “  a  sluice  gate  of  the  most  intolerable  oppres¬ 
sion  ”.  The  object  of  the  bill  was  condemned  together 
with  its  sponsors.  “  The  men  who  made  the  Reform  Bill 
were  not  fools;  neither  were  the  middle  classes,  for  whom 
it  was  made.  The  Whigs  saw,  and  the  middle  classes  saw, 
that  the  effect  of  the  bill  would  be  to  unite  all  property 
against  all  poverty  ”  3  Thomas  Attwood,  who  had  exerted 
the  greatest  influence  to  secure  the  passage  of  the  Reform 
Act,  declared  that  he  regretted  that  he  had  worked  for  the 
reform  which  brought  “  troops  of  sycophants  and  time¬ 
servers  ”  to  the  legislative  chamber.  The  Whigs  were 
stamped  as  a  party  for  the  dishonest,  for  the  timid  and  for 
the  unscrupulously  ambitious,  and  their  rule  as  the  suprem¬ 
acy  of  the  “  hypocritical,  conniving  and  liberty-undermin¬ 
ing  Whigs  ”. 

1  J.  T.  Bunce,  History  of  the  Corporation  of  Birmingham,  Birming¬ 
ham,  1878,  vol.  i,  pp.  128-9. 

2  Tract  published  by  the  Complete  Suffrage  Union,  The  Rise  and 
Progress  of  the  Complete  Suffrage  Movement,  London,  1843. 

3  Bronterre’s  National  Reformer,  Feb.  11,  1837. 


38 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[38 

The  attitude  of  the  radicals  towards  the  ruling  party  can 
be  seen  from  the  characteristic  picture  drawn  in  one  of  the 
Chartist  papers  under  the  caption  “  What  is  Whiggery?”  1 

A  Whig  is  a  political  shuffler,  without  honor,  integrity,  or 
patriotism.  Dissimulation,  selfishness,  and  baseness  are  his 
prime  moving  principles.  In  private  life  he  is  a  stately  despot, 
and  a  surly  tyrant;  cunning,  hypocrisy,  and  falsehood  are  too 
frequently  familiar  to  his  mind,  and  he  sometimes  treats  his 
workmen  (if  he  has  any)  more  like  a  gang  of  convicts  than 
a  useful  band  of  honest,  independent  mechanics.  If,  as  some¬ 
times  happens,  they  refuse  to  submit  passively  to  his  injustice 
and  cruelty,  they  are  persecuted  and  reviled,  and  compelled 
to  seek  refuge  from  his  malignancy  beyond  the  limits  of  his 
arbitrary  authority.  .  .  .  When  the  Whig  is  a  mighty  poli¬ 
tician,  he  courts  public  favor,  smiles  graciously  on  the  people, 
makes  glorious  promises  of  reform,  cajoles  and  flatters  them, 
until  he  gets  them  to  assist  him  in  advancing  his  selfish  schemes. 
But  he  treats  them  with  ingratitude  and  contempt,  when  they 
afterwards  remind  him  of  his  obligations  and  request  him  to 
perform  them. 

A* 

The  commissions  of  inquiry  became  a  byword  of  political 
corruption  and  inactivity: 

Set  them  to  make  a  report  on  any  public  subject,  give  them, 
for  example,  a  brief  to  fill  up  against  the  poor  and  the  Poor 
Laws,  and  they  will  do  it  to  their  employer’s  satisfaction ;  it  is 
their  vocation  faithfully  to  serve  those  by  whom  they  are  paid, 
or  hope  to  be  paid,  and  little  of  conscientious  responsibility 
to  truth  or  justice  is  felt  in  the  execution  of  the  appointed  task.2 

The  rampant  political  favoritism  was  also  strikingly  satir¬ 
ized  by  Sydney  Smith,  when  he  said  that  if  you  met  a  Whig, 

1  The  Chartist  Circular,  May  2,  1840. 

2  The  Black  Book :  An  Exposition  of  Abuses  in  Church  and  State , 
Courts  of  Law,  etc.,  London,  1835,  appendix,  p.  61. 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


39 


39] 

whom  you  had  never  seen  before,  your  doubt  was  “  not 
whether  he  was  a  commissioner  or  not,  but  what  the  depart¬ 
ment  of  human  life  might  be  into  which  he  had  been  ap¬ 
pointed  to  inquire  The  hero  of  the  Reform  Bill,  Russell 
himself,  who  in  1831  accused  the  landlords  of  usurpation 
of  power  in  violation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  country, 
according  to  which  “  no  man  could  be  taxed  for  the  sup¬ 
port  of  the  State  who  had  not  consented,  by  himself  or  his 
representative,  to  such  tax  ”,  soon  became  an  accomplice  to 
such  usurpation,  derided  the  demand  for  universal  suffrage 
and  went  down  in  history  with  the  well-deserved  nickname 
of  “  Finality  Jack  ”.1 

The  Whigs  became  even  more  unpopular  after  their  elec¬ 
tion  in  1835.  They  had  come  in  on  promise  of  retrench¬ 
ment  and,  instead,  they  increased  taxation ;  they  had  vowed 
reforms  and,  when  in  power,  forced  upon  the  people  the 
odious  New  Poor  Law.  The  assertion  that  “  Whigs  and 
Tories  are  the  two  thieves  between  which  this  nation  has 
been  crucified  ”  2  was  not  the  conviction  of  but  one  indi¬ 
vidual.  The  Reformed  Parliament  discussed  everything 
except  what  Carlyle  styled  “  the  alpha  and  omega  of  'all 
questions  ”, — “  the  condition-of-England  question  The 
reformers  were  satisfied,  as  the  bard  Praed  puts  it : 

To  promise,  pause,  prepare,  postpone, 

And  end  by  letting  things  alone. 

In  short,  to  earn  the  people’s  pay, 

By  doing  nothing  every  day. 

The  ruling  party  was  detested  not  alone  by  the  radicals. 
Ex-Chancellor  Lord  Brougham,  who  despised  the  latter, 

i 

I 

1  The  nickname  was  derived  from  a  phrase  of  his  speech  of  June  23, 
1837,  in  which  he  referred  to  the  Reform  Bill  as  a  “  final  measure.” 

8  See  R.  W.  C.  Taylor,  Notes  of  a  Tour  in  the  Manufacturing  Dis¬ 
tricts  of  Lancashire,  London,  1842,  p.  271. 


40 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[40 

expressed  the  sentiment  of  many  a  conservative  when  he 
said  in  1839:  “  I  have  little  thought  to  have  lived  to  hear 
it  said  by  the  Whigs  of  1839,  ‘  Let  us  rally  round  the 
queen;  never  mind  the  House  of  Commons;  never  mind 
measures;  throw  principles  to  the  dogs;  leave  pledges  un¬ 
redeemed;  but,  for  God’s  sake,  rally  round  the  throne 
Disraeli  also  laid  great  stress  on  the  irresponsibility  of  the 
Whigs,  although  he  exaggerated  the  significance  of  the 
political  causes  in  the  Chartist  movement.1 

The  Whigs  were  crushed  by  their  own  incompetence  and 
treachery  even  as  early  as  1838.  The  notorious  “  Bedcham¬ 
ber  Plot  ”,  which  brought  down  a  tempest  of  ridicule  on 
the  heads  of  the  chivalrous  Whigs,  gave  them  a  chance  for 
shelter  “  behind  the  women’s  petticoats  ”,  but  only  for  a 
short  time.  The  people,  disgusted  with  their  perfidy,  lost 
all  confidence  in  them  and  overwhelmingly  defeated  them 
at  the  next  election.  Their  rule,  however,  was  the  more 
ignominious  because  of  the  great  economic  distress  and 
physical  and  moral  degeneration  which  prevailed  during 
their  administration  without  any  serious  attempt  being 
made  by  the  government  at  alleviation.  Indeed,  so  appall¬ 
ing  was  the  wretchedness  as  to  be  almost  beyond  credence, 
were  it  not  for  official  records  of  that  period.  This  wretch¬ 
edness  was,  to  a  great  extent,  the  direct  result  of  the  New 
Poor  Law  of  1834  and  its  administration  by  the  Whigs. 

The  chicanery  and  bribery  on  the  part  of  the  landlords, 
and  the  fraud  and  perjury  on  the  part  of  the  paupers, 
fostered  by  the  old  Poor  Laws,  made  their  repeal  impera¬ 
tive.  The  industrial,  as  well  as  the  agricultural  districts, 
were  turned  into  headquarters  of  permanent  pauperism 
with  all  its  revolting  consequences.  Riots,  incendiarism,  as¬ 
sault  and  murder  became  common  events.  Under  these 

1  See  Hansard’s  Parliamentary  Debates,  third  series,  1839,  vol.  xlix, 
pp.  246-251. 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


41 


41] 

laws  the  able-bodied  and  efficient  pauper  was  denied  the 
right  of  voluntary  choice  of  settlement.  The  kind  of  work 
and  his  income  were  fixed  by  the  magistrates,  who  could 
very  seldom  ascertain  the  man’s  previous  earnings.  The 
parish  authorities  were  demoralized  to  the  very  marrow  and 
looked  upon  the  parish  as  upon  their  prey.  The  pauper 
had  to  be  satisfied  not  only  with  the  master  they  had  chosen 
for  him,  but  also  with  the  woman  they  had  made  him  marry. 

The  injudicious  provisions  and  application  of  the  old 
laws  put  a  premium  on  laziness  and  pauperized  not  only 
indigent  men,  but  also  the  respectable  classes  of  mechanics : 

I  am  every  week  astonished  by  seeing  persons  come  whom  I 
never  thought  would  have  come, — reports  Mr.  Chadwick,  one 
of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners. — The  greater  number  of  our 
out-door  paupers  are  worthless  people ;  but  still  the  number 
of  decent  people  who  ought  to  have  made  provision  for  them¬ 
selves,  and  who  come,  is  very  great  and  increasing.  One 
brings  another;  one  member  of  a  family  brings  the  rest  of  a 
family.  .  .  .  Thus  we  have  pauper  father,  pauper  wife,  pauper 
son,  and  pauper  grand-children  frequently  applying  on  the 
same  relief-day.  .  .  .  Indeed,  the  malady  of  pauperism  has 
not  only  got  amongst  respectable  mechanics,  but  we  find  even 
persons  who  may  be  considered  of  the  middle  classes,  such  as 
petty  masters,  small  master  bricklayers.1 

The  bulky  volumes  of  the  Report  of  the  Commission,  of 
which  Nassau  Senior  was  a  member,  proved  quite  conclu¬ 
sively  that  the  very  foundation  of  English  economic  life 
was  in  jeopardy.  Since  every  employer  could  choose  be¬ 
tween  a  workman  solely  dependent  on  his  wages  and  a 
pauper,  whose  earnings  were  supplemented  by  the  parish 
rates,  it  was  but  natural  that  only  the  latter  should  get  em¬ 
ployment,  thus  dragging  down  wages  and  increasing  the 

1  Reports  from  Commissioners,  1834,  vol.  xxvii,  p.  26. 


42 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[42 

army  of  professional  paupers.  “  The  surplus  labourer  is 
driven  by  the  overseer  into  the  market  to  compete  with  the 
regular  workman,” — writes  an  investigator, — “his  work  is 
offered  at  a  reduced  price,  or  he  is  even  billeted,  and  his 
pay  entirely  derived  from  the  rates.  With  this  cheap 
laborer  the  regular  one  can  stand  no  chance ;  he  is  undersold 
in  his  own  market,  and  his  only  property,  the  work  of  his 
hands  and  the  sweat  of  his  brows,  is  wrested  from  him  ,\1 
Furthermore,  the  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners 
shows  that  a  more  or  less  self-respecting  and  industrious 
laborer,  who  had  managed  to  lay  by  a  part  of  his  wages 
for  a  rainy  day,  was  refused  work,  “  till  his  savings  were 
gone;  and  the  knowledge  that  this  would  be  the  case,  acted 
as  a  preventive  against  savings  Pauperism  which  reached 
a  menacing  point  in  1832,  when  one  person  out  of  every 
seven  was  receiving  relief,  put  the  very  life  of  the  nation 
at  stake,  and  became  most  destructive  of  the  family  and  of 
society.2  The  repeal  of  the  old  laws  was  urgent  also  be¬ 
cause  the  growth  of  industry  and  the  development  of  the 
factory  system  needed  complete  mobility  of  labor,  which 
the  law  of  settlement  made  impossible.3  Something  had 
to  be  done,  some  remedy  had  to  be  found,  and  the  reforms 
of  1834  were  proclaimed  the  panacea  for  the  social  evil. 
The  chief  ingredient  of  the  remedy  has  since  become  known 
as  the  workhouse  test.  All  relief,  either  in  money  or  in 
provisions  to  able-bodied  persons,  was  declared  illegal  ex¬ 
cept  when  rendered  in  public  and  well-regulated  work- 
houses,  or,  as  the  poor  classes  called  them,  a  Poor  Law  Bas- 
tiles 

1  William  Day,  An  Inquiry  into  the  Poor  Laws  and  Surplus  Labor, 
and  their  Mutual  Reaction,  London,  1832,  p.  16. 

2  See  Report  from  Commissioners,  1834,  vol.  xxvii,  pp.  45  and  54. 

3  See  in  this  connection  the  Extracts  from  Information  received  by 
Her  Majesty's  Commissioners,  as  to  the  Administration  and  Operation 
of  the  Poor  Laws,  London,  1833,  pp.  271-272. 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


43 


43l 

The  sudden  change  caused  by  the  New  Poor  Law,  which 
was  strenuously  opposed,  among  other  representatives,  by 
the  friend  of  the  poor,  William  Cobbett,  and  by  the  then 
young  and  uninfluential  politician  Disraeli,  naturally  intensi¬ 
fied  the  hatred  of  the  poor  toward  the  property-owners  and 
still  more  opened  the  eyes  of  the  working  classes  to  the 
fathomless  gulf  between  themselves  and  the  Liberals,  into 
whose  hands  they  had  unsuspectingly  put  the  reins  of  au¬ 
thority.  When  the  bill  was  still  pending,  the  uncompromis¬ 
ing  Cobbett  emphatically  declared  that  the  object  of  the 
bill  was  “  to  rob  the  poor  man  to  enrich  the  landowner  ’V 
and  this  opinion  became  current  all  over  the  vast  stretches 
of  the  misery-infested  land.  The  glove  which  was  cast  to 
the  non-possessing  classes,  challenging  them  indiscrimi¬ 
nately  either  to  become  prisoners  or  to  starve,  was  picked 
up  with  threatening  air,  first,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  by 
a  few  friends  of  the  people,  and  then  by  the  people  them¬ 
selves.  Representative  Leech  warned  the  House  that  the 
new  law  would  inevitably  render  the  breach  between  the 
rich  and  the  poor  wider  than  it  had  hitherto  ever  been,2 
while  representative  Hodges  prophesied  trouble  with  the 
unemployed  laborers.  “  To  be  sure,  the  discontented  might 
be  put  down  if  they  were  in  the  wrong”,  he  said;  “  but 
when  they  had  justice  on  their  side,  and  were  goaded  on  by 
their  grievances,  the  recollection  of  any  collision  between 
them  and  the  police  or  soldiery  to  put  them  down  would  be 
never  effaced  from  their  minds  ”.a  Still  more  threatening 
was  the  speech  of  Thomas  Attwood  in  the  House  of  Com¬ 
mons  on  the  nth  of  August,  1834: 

The  people  had  a  right  to  claim  relief  if  they  did  not  obtain 

1  Hansard’s  Parliamentary  Debates ,  vol.  xxiv,  1834,  p.  1051. 

8  Ibid.,  pp.  1059-1060. 

8  Ibid.,  p.  1030. 


44 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[44 

employment, — as  good  a  right  as  the  noble  Lord  had  to  the 
hat  on  his  head.  If  the  people  were  prevented  from  living 
honestly,  they  would  be  justified  in  living  dishonestly.  .  .  .  For 
the  law  said,  and  it  was  a  principle  of  our  Constitution,  that 
obedience  was  to  be  contingent  upon  protection,  and  that  where 
no  protection  was  given  no  obedience  could  be  exacted.1 

The  indignation  with  the  New  Poor  Law  grew  apace  be¬ 
cause  of  the  stringency  of  administration  which  provoked 
Mr.  Harvey,  representative  for  Southwark,  to  stigmatize 
the  new  law  as  “  one  of  the  most  cruel,  heartless,  and  sel¬ 
fish  bills  that  ever  was  passed  into  a  law  ”,  and  to  declare 
that  the  funds  “  were  administered  with  the  most  barbarous 
and  heartless  severity  ”.  Another  representative  called  it 
the  New  Poor  Law  Murder  Bill.  Daniel  O’Connell,  the 
famous  Irish  patriot,  was  so  much  impressed  by  the  ac¬ 
counts  of  the  sufferings  endured  by  the  poor  through  the 
New  Poor  Law  that  he  concluded  that  the  alleged  remedy 
was  worse  than  the  disease,  and  vigorously,  though  vainly, 
fought  its  introduction  in  Ireland. 

An  amendment  of  the  old  Poor  Laws  was  inevitable, 
but  the  precipitate  break  with  the  established  system 
could  not  but  entail  disastrous  results.  The  Poor  Law 
Commissioners,  then  known  under  the  nicknames  of 
“  bashaws  of  Somerset  House  ”  and  “  concentrated  icicles  ”, 
were  apparently  so  dejected  by  the  evils  of  an  institu¬ 
tion  which  threatened  degeneracy  to  the  whole  nation, 
that  they  could  not  avoid  the  unhappy  but  common 
mistake  of  substituting  one  extreme  for  another.  Repre¬ 
sentative  Robinson  was  perfectly  right,  when  he  attacked 
the  third  reading  of  the  bill  on  the  ground  that  the  “  odious 
and  cruel  measure  ”  contained  no  single  feature  which  held 
out  the  least  prospect  or  hope  to  the  poor,  no  single  provi- 


1  Hansard’s  Parliamentary  Debates,  vol.  xxv,  p.  1224. 


THE  WHIG  RULE 


45 


45] 

sion  which  would  give  additional  employment  to  the  des¬ 
titute,  and  that  it  treated  all  able-bodied  laborers  alike.  The 
poor  man,  he  argued,  would  be  told,  “  you  must  either  go 
into  the  workhouse  or  we  cannot  give  you  relief  ”,  and  the 
effect  of  such  a  system,  which  made  no  distinction  whatever 
between  honesty  and  immorality,  between  the  imbecile  and 
the  able-bodied,  would  be  perilous.1  These  voices  of  warn¬ 
ing,  however,  fell  on  deaf  ears.  The  bill  was  passed  under 
protest,2  and  hardly  had  the  people  time  to  realize  what  had 
taken  place  in  the  Houses,  when  the  local  “  Dogberries  ” 
began  to  treat  them  with  barbarous  cruelty.  The  discipline 
which  was  at  once  introduced  in  the  workhouses  fell  like  a 
thunderbolt  on  many  a  wretched  family.  Aged  men  found 
themselves  separated  from  their  wives  and  imprisoned  in 
the  workhouse,  where  the  inmate  was  never  allowed  to 
forget  that  he  was  under  strict  orders,  and  where  he  was 
compelled  to  live  on  a  diet  frequently  insufficient  for  the 

1  Hansard’s  Parliamentary  Debates ,  vol.  xxiv,  1834,  P-  1042. 

1  The  protest  which  was  entered  by  some  members  of  the  House  of 
Lords  against  the  passing  of  the  Poor  Laws’  Amendment  Bill  con¬ 
tained,  among  others,  the  following  reasons : 

“  1.  Because  this  Bill  is  unjust  and  cruel  to  the  poor.  It  imprisons 
in  workhouses,  for  not  working,  those  who  cannot,  by  the  hardest 
labor,  obtain  wages  sufficient  to  provide  necessaries  for  their  wives 
and  children,  although  the  want  of  employment  and  the  low  rate  of 
wages  have  been  occasioned  by  the  impolicy  and  negligence  of  the 
Government.  .  .  . 

“4.  Because  we  think  the  system  suggested  in  the  Bill,  of  consoli¬ 
dating  immensely  extensive  unions  of  parishes,  and  establishing  work- 
houses  necessarily  at  great  distances  from  many  parishes,  and  thereby 
dividing  families  and  removing  children  from  their  parents,  merely  be¬ 
cause  they  are  poor,  will  be  found  justly  abhorrent  to  the  best  feelings 
of  the  general  population  of  the  country;  and  especially  inasmuch  as  it 
introduces  the  children  of  the  agricultural  poor  to  town  poorhouses, 
it  will  conduce  greatly  to  the  contamination  of  their  moral  principles, 
and  be  calculated  to  prevent  their  obtaining  in  youth  those  habits  of 
industry  most  likely  to  be  beneficial  to  them  in  after-life.” 

See  ibid.,  vol.  xxv,  1834,  PP-  1098-9. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


bare  sustenance  of  life.  Mothers  were  dragged  away,  like 
criminals,  from  their  infants;  sick  men  and  women  were 
made  to  walk  long  distances  for  relief,  some  of  them  expir¬ 
ing  on  the  way.  Tears  and  starvation  became  the  poor 
man’s  lot.1  The  unfortunate  inmates  of  the  poorhouses 
were  even  denied  the  consolation  of  religion,  being  deprived 
of  the  liberty  of  attending  houses  of  worship. 

Such  were  the  reforms  introduced  during  the  Whig  rule. 


1  The  literature  of  the  day  became  permeated  with  expressions  of 
indignation,  of  which  the  following  lines  by  Maurice  Harcourt,  written 
in  1837,  may  serve  as  an  example: 

“Tears!  Tears  are  the  portion  of  the  Poor, 

For  the  great  ones  fain  would  see  how  much  they  can  endure; 
And  to  prove  their  pity  never  fails, 

They  have  built  the  wretched  union  gaols, 

Where  King  Starvation  reigns  supreme, 

And  plenty  is  a  pauper’s  dream ! 

And  ’mid  this  mockery  of  life 
(Lingers  the  pale  yet  lovely  wife, 

Torn  from  her  first  and  dearest  tye, 

In  this  abode  of  gloom  to  die.”  , 


CHAPTER  III 


Oh !  glorious  was  that  mortal’s  skill, 
Who  first  devised  the  Poor  Law  Bill, 
To  teach  in  this  enlightened  time, 

That  poverty’s  the  vilest  crime. 

— Maurice  Har court. 

The  New  Poor  Law 

The  philosophy  of  the  New  Poor  Law,  borrowed  from 
James  Mill,  was  based  on  the  Malthusian  economic  doctrine. 
To  aid  the  people  who'  did  not  reserve  seats  at  nature’s  feast 
meant  to  injure  others  who  had  better  claims.  The  com¬ 
missioners  who  were  entrusted  with  the  enforcement  of  the 
New  Poor  Law  thoroughly  understood  their  mission  which 
was  once  stated  by  Dr.  Kay  at  a  public  meeting.  He  said 
bluntly :  “  Our  intention  is  to  make  the  workhouses  as  like 
prisons  as  possible,  and  to  make  them  as  uncomfortable  as 
possible.”  1  These  intentions  were,  indeed,  carried  into  ef¬ 
fect  with  a  faithfulness  worthy  of  a  better  object.  The  im¬ 
pression  made  by  the  description  of  the  poorhouses  is  ap¬ 
palling,  and  even  Mr.  T.  W.  Fowle,  the  ardent  advocate  of 
the  New  Poor  Law,  vainly  tries  to  conceal  his  confusion 
in  an  array  of  words,  and  the  following  lines  sound  like 
mockery:  “Wise  men  will  note  with  satisfaction  that  the 
use  of  the  rod  is  not  forbidden  in  the  case  of  naughty  boys. 
.  .  .  The  privilege  of  flogging  enjoyed  by  children  of  the 
upper  classes  is  denied  to  paupers  above  the  age  of  four¬ 
teen.”  2  The  description  given  by  Mr.  Fowle  of  the  effect 

1  Hansard,  vol.  xli,  p.  1014. 

2  T.  W.  Fowle,  The  Poor  Law,  London ,  1881,  p.  139. 

47] 


47 


48 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[48 

of  promiscuous  aggregation  on  the  poorhouse  inmates  and 
especially  on  the  children,  restrained  as  it  is,  presents  a 
lurid  picture  of  mental  and  moral  contamination.1 2  The 
criminal  negligence  of  children,  who  were  maintained  in  the 
workhouses,  on  the  part  of  the  officers  was  exposed  by  a 
surgeon  in  his  letter  to  Lord  John  Russell."  Emaciation  was 
evident  in  almost  all  the  eighty  children  within  the  walls 
of  the  workhouse  of  St.  James  : 

The  picture  is  almost  too  horrible  to  describe.  I  found  the 
children  with  large  heads,  tumefied  bodies,  shrivelled  and 
wasted  limbs  mostly  in  a  sitting  posture,  with  their  legs  crossed 
— and  I  found  upon  enquiring  of  the  nurse  .  .  .  that  any 
change  from  this  position  occasioned  them  pain,  and  caused 
them  to  cry.  .  .  .  They  have,  in  short,  become  rickety  from 
the  want  of  exercise  and,  I  fear,  an  insufficient  supply  of 
wholesome  nourishment.  .  .  .  Languid  and  feeble  circulation, 
and  other  marks  of  general  debility,  are  strikingly  apparent. 

.  .  .  The  sight  was  truly  appalling.  ...  It  is  quite  clear  that 
such  an  uniform  character  of  disease  among  so  many  children, 
the  offspring  of  different  parents,  must  be  the  result  of  the 
particular  manner  in  which  these  children  have  been  nursed 
and  maintained.  .  .  .  They  are  unfortunately  too  young  to 
tell  their  own  tale ;  but  although  their  intellects  are  not  suffi¬ 
ciently  matured  to  give  this  information,  their  appearance  and 
condition  bespeak  it  but  too  powerfully.  I  do  not  hesitate  to 
declare  mv  firm  belief  that  their  wretched  condition  is  the 
result  of  either  an  insufficient  supply  of  food,  or  a  supply  of 
improper  food,  and  a  want  of  exercise.  .  .  .  Either  of  these 

1  Fowle,  op.  cit.,  pp.  142-144.  See  also  on  this  point  Sidney  and  Bea¬ 
trice  Webb,  The  Break-Up  of  the  Poor  Lazv:  Being  Part  One  of  the 
Minority  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commission,  London,  1909,  chap.  1. 

2  On  the  punishment  and  treatment  of  children  by  the  workhouse 
authorities,  see  also  speech  of  representative  Ferrand  in  Hansard,  op. 
cit.,  third  series,  vol.  lxvi,  pp.  1226-1228. 


THE  NEW  POOR  LAW 


49 


49] 

causes,  or  the  combination  of  them,  is  adequate  to  the  pn>- 
duction  of  the  effects  it  has  been  my  unhappiness  to  witness.1 

The  cruelties  perpetrated  in  various  workhouses  were  di¬ 
vulged  by  non-partisan  men,  such  as  the  Rev.  William  Carus 
Wilson,  who  submitted  to  the  legislature  his  report  on  the 
“  wanton  cruelty  of  the  officers  of  the  New  Poor  Laws.”  2 
These  official  statements  and  the  accounts  given  by  the 
London  Times  and  many  local  opposition  newspapers  of  the 
crimes  committed  by  workhouse  officials,  together  with  the 
imaginative  pathetic  pictures  of  Oliver  Twist  and  other 
workhouse  heroes  of  fiction,  did  not  fail  to  provoke  uni¬ 
versal  detestation  of  the  new  system  of  poor  relief.  The 
indigent  actually  shrank  with  fear  at  the  thought  of  the 
workhouse,  and  in  many  cases  preferred  to  starve  rather 
than  enter  the  “  Bastiles.”  The  net  result  was  that 

as  a  matter  of  fact  (the  large  towns  excepted)  they  (the  work- 
houses)  do  not  contain  in  many  cases  half,  in  some  not  a 
quarter  of  the  inmates  for  which  they  were  built,  so  that  the 
waste  in  keeping  up  large  unfilled  establishments,  each  with 
an  expensive  staff  of  officers,  is  very  great,  indeed;  thus  the 
salaries  and  rations  of  officers  (including,  however,  that  pro¬ 
portion  which  is  spent  in  the  administration  of  out-relief)  is 
considerable  over  a  million,  while  the  total  maintenance  of  in¬ 
door  paupers  is  only  about  a  million  and  three- quarters?1 

The  defenders  of  the  New  Poor  Law  did  anything  but  en¬ 
lighten  the  non-possessing  classes  on  the  real  significance 
and  desirability  of  the  new  measure.  In  his  long  and  ela- 

1  T.  J.  Pettigrew,  A  Letter  to  the  Right  Hon.  Lord  John  Russell,  on 
the  Condition  of  the  Pauper  Children  of  St.  James,  Westminster,  Lon¬ 
don,  1836,  pp.  11-12. 

2  William  Carus  Wilson,  Remarks  on  Certain  Operations  of  the  New 
Poor  Laws,  Kirkby  Lonsdale,  1838. 

*  Fowle,  op.  cit.,  p.  141. 


50 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[50 

borate  speech  which  he  delivered  in  the  House  of  Lords  on 
July  2 1,  1834,  the  Chancellor  Lord  Brougham,  the  father 
of  the  Bill,  extolled  the  wisdom  of  Malthus  and  declared 
with  brutal  frankness  that  the  New  Poor  Law  was  intended 
as  a  preventive  check  on  the  unlimited  increase  of  popula¬ 
tion.1  This  declaration,  coupled  with  his  express  hatred 
of  charitable  institutions  and  his  cynical  denunciation  of 
hospitals  for  old  age,  called  forth  a  storm  of  indignation. 
As  ever,  the  undaunted  Cobbett  came  out  with  a  character¬ 
istic  reply:  “The  great  object  of  the  Bill,”  said  he, 

was  to  teach  the  poor  to  live  as  man  and  wife,  without  having 
any  children.  This  was  a  base  and  filthy  philosophy,  and  yet 
a  book  had  been  published  showing  the  means  of  carrying  the 
principles  of  Malthus  into  effect.  Every  farmer  knew  that 
the  effect  of  the  Bill  was  to  take  away  the  poor  rates  from 
the  poor,  and  to  put  them  into  the  pockets  of  the  landlords.2 

Cobbett’s  erroneous  view  that  the  Poor  Law  was  enacted 
for  the  benefit  of  the  landlords  was  shared  by  many  of  his 
radical  colleagues.  Their  hatred  of  the  landed  aristocracy 
rendered  them  utterly  incapable  of  realizing  the  importance 
and  the  advance  of  the  new  capitalist  class.  It  was  Bron- 
terre,  subsequently  the  “  school-master  ”  of  Chartism,  who 
attacked  the  new  law  as  an  instrument  of  exploitation  by  the 
manufacturers.  In  the  first  number  of  his  National  Re¬ 
former ,  dated  January  7,  1837,  he  writes : 

Our  work-people,  both  agricultural  and  manufacturing,  are 
already  ground  down  as  low  as  commercial  avarice  can  grind 
them,  without  exterminating  them  altogether;  yet  the  money- 
monster  is  not  half  satisfied.  As  a  last  resource,  this  monster 
has  now  passed  a  New  Poor  Law  Act,  to  make  the  laborers 

1  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xxv,  1834,  pp.  211-251. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  1216. 


THE  NEW  POOR  LAW 


51 


live  on  coarser  food,  or  on  no  food  at  all — an  Act  which  treats 
the  victims  it  has  impoverished  as  other  states  treat  convicted 
felons — an  act  which  gives  a  felon’s  garb,  a  felon’s  fare,  and 
a  felon’s  gaol  to  the  broken-down  man  whose  toil  has  en¬ 
riched  the  monster,  and  whose  only  crime  is  that  he  did  not 
strangle  the  monster  a  century  ago.  .  .  .  Yes,  my  friends,  the 
New  Poor  Law  Act  is  the  last  rotten  blood-stained  prop  by 
which  the  money-monster  hopes  to  sustain  the  tottering  fabric 
of  his  cannibal  system — of  that  merciless  system,  which  first 
makes  you  poor  in  the  midst  of  wealth  of  your  own  producing, 
and  would  then  bastile  and  starve  you  for  the  fruits  of  its 
own  barbarity. 


This  view  was  subsequently  elaborated  by  most  of  the 
Chartist  writers.  Feargus  O’Connor,  the  foremost  Chartist 
leader,  attacked  the  new  law  on  the  ground  that  it  was  both 
a  result  and  a  cause  of  the  excessive  use  of  machinery : 

This  act  was  framed  by  Lord  Brougham,  as  the  champion  of 
the  middle  classes,  who  were  most  strongly  represented  by  the 
steam  producers,  and  it  was  framed  purposely  with  a  view  to 
seduce  those  into  a  delusive  market  who  would  have  risen  in 
their  might  and  annihilated  any  government  that  dared  thus 
violate  their  trust  by  the  commission  of  wholesale  plunder,  had 
it  not  been  for  the  safe  retreat  promised  to  the  abandoned  in 
the  artificial  market.  It  is  the  nature  of  man  to  use  all  means 
to  better  his  situation,  and  the  poor  countryman  who  gave  up 
his  house  and  home  under  the  compulsion  of  the  Poor  Law 
Amendment  Act,  in  the  hope  of  going  to  a  permanent  situation, 
was  unconscious  in  the  “  hey-day  ”  of  manual  labor,  as  then 
applied  to  infant  machinery,  that  each  improvement  in  the  one 
would  be  a  nail  in  the  coffin  of  the  other.  Estates  were  cleared 
of  willing  immigrants  seduced  by  the  spirit  of  the  moment, 
and  when  anticipation  had  failed,  they  then  framed  the  strin¬ 
gent  rules  under  which  the  hellish  law  had  placed  them,  when 
they  sought  for  an  asylum  in  the  parish  of  their  fathers.  Had 
it  not  been  for  machinery,  the  Poor  Lazv  Amendment  Act 


52 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[52 

never  would  have  passed — nay,  never  would  have  been  ventured 
upon,  because  the  whole  force  of  popular  indignation  would 
have  been  directed  against  the  general  plunder,  while  opposition 
was  much  mitigated  in  consequence  of  the  casual  provision 
which  machinery  offered  as  a  substitute;  thus  has  the  Poor 
Law  Amendment  Act  been  another  direct  effect  upon  ma¬ 
chinery.1 

From  the  point  of  view  of  social  causation,  it  is,  indeed, 
utterly  irrelevant  whether  or  not  the  advocacy  of  the  New 
Poor  Law  was  prompted  by  personal  or  by  class  interests. 
It  must  be  conceded  that,  whatever  the  motives  might  have 
been,  the  object  of  checking  poverty  and  moral  degradation 
was  commendable.  The  fundamental  propositions  of  Lord 
Brougham  were  mere  truisms,  “  that  men  should  be  paid 
according  to  the  work  they  do”;  that  men  should  be  em¬ 
ployed  and  paid  “  according  to  the  demand  for  their  labor 
and  its  value  to  the  employer,”  and  that  “  they  who '  toil 
should  not  live  worse  than  those  who  are  idle.”  2  However, 
when  one  puts  himself  in  the  position  of  the  poor  contem¬ 
poraries  of  the  Lord  Chancellor  who,  directly  or  indirectly, 
were  concerned  in,  and  affected  by,  the  new  law,  he  must  as¬ 
sume  a  different  attitude.  Blinded  by  his  extreme  hatred  of 
charity, — even  assuming  that  this  hatred  was  nurtured  not 
by  a  bad  heart,  but  by  sentiments  of  a  public-spirited  man  * 
— the  noble  Lord  displayed  his  feeling  in  a  way  which  the 
common  people  could  not  help  but  abhor.  It  must  have 
been  brazen-headedness,  if  not  hard-heartedness,  to  come  be¬ 
fore  one  army  of  destitute  men  and  women  who  were  dis- 

1  English  Chartist  Circular,  no.  64. 

2  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xxv,  1834,  p.  218. 

5  The  Lord  Chancellor  was  apparently  afraid  of  passing  into  history 
with  the  reputation  of  a  hard-hearted  and  short-sighted  man,  and 
grasped  the  opportunity  at  the  next  discussion  to  correct  this  impres¬ 
sion.  See  Hansard,  vol.  xxv,  p.  436. 


THE  NEW  POOR  LAW 


53 


53] 

placed,  like  so  many  useless  tools,  by  the  new  machinery, 
and  before  another  still  greater  army  of  men  who  were 
compelled  by  the  order  of  the  land  to  shun  decency  and 
regard  thrift  and  savings  as  a  thing  for  which  they  would 
be  punished  by  the  parish  with  unemployment, — it  must 
have  been  fanatical  blindness  to  come  before  the  nation 
with  an  argument  like  the  following: 

Sickness  is  a  thing  which  a  provident  man  should  look  forward 
to,  and  provide  against,  as  part  of  the  ordinary  ills  of  life. 
.  .  .  But  when  I  come  to  hospitals  for  old  age — as  old  age  is 
before  all  men — as  every  man  is  every  day  approaching  nearer 
to  that  goal — all  prudent  men  of  independent  spirit  will,  in  the 
vigour  of  their  days,  lay  by  sufficient  to  maintain  them,  when 
age  shall  end  their  labor.  Hospitals,  therefore,  for  the  support 
of  old  men  and  old  women,  may,  strictly  speaking,  be  regarded 
as  injurious  in  their  effects  upon  the  community.1 

This  speech  brought  forth  an  outburst  of  disgust  and  anta¬ 
gonism,  and  was  made  most  use  of  by  the  Tories  as  well 
as  the  Radicals. 

The  sponsors  of  the  New  Poor  Law,  however,  treated 
with  cruel  disregard  all  the  protests  and  warnings  of  their 
fellow  members  of  Parliament  and  other  antagonists.  Far 
from  heeding  the  petitions  of  the  people,  they  rejoiced  at  the 
result  achieved  immediately  after  the  enforcement  of  the 
new  provisions.  The  idea  of  the  framers  of  the  bill,  which, 
to  use  Cobbett’s  words,  was  meant  “  as  a  stepping  stone  to  a 
total  abolition  of  all  relief  for  the  poor”,2  seemed  to  approach 
realization,  inasmuch  as  both  the  number  of  applicants  for 
relief  and  the  amount  of  relief  itself  were  at  once  con¬ 
siderably  reduced.  It  is  true  that  the  relief  officers  had  to 
quell  many  a  riot  in  the  new  unions  ;  but  this  little  dampened 

1  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xxv,  1834,  pp.  221-222. 

a  Ibid.,  vol.  xxv,  1834,  p.  1216. 


54 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[54 

the  hopes  of  the  commissioners,  since  the  suppression  was 
not  a  difficult  task.1  The  stepping-stone  proved  to  be  of 
great  avail,  as  the  reduction  of  the  poor  rates  in  thirteen  of 
the  largest  parishes  reached  twenty  per  cent  the  first  year.2 
The  expenditures  for  poor  relief  were  fast  sliding  down¬ 
ward,  as  may  be  seen  from  the  following  table : 3 

Relief  of  the  Poor 


Year.  Pounds. 

1832  .  7,036,968 

1833  .  6,790,799 

1834  .  6,317,255 

1835  .  5,526,416 

1836  .  4,717,629 

1837  .  4,044,741 


The  commissioners,  of  course,  could  not  deny  that  the 
progress  of  the  change  had  been  highly  favored  by  the 
prosperous  state  of  the  manufacturing  districts  and  especi¬ 
ally  by  the  cheapness  of  provisions  which  marked  the  first 
half  of  the  decade.4  Yet  they  had  great  faith  in  a 
system  which  was  shunned  by  the  people  from  the  very 
start.  In  the  Faringdon  Union  alone,  for  example,  work- 
house  relief  was  offered  to  240  able-bodied  laborers,  of 
whom  not  more  than  twenty  entered  the  house,  and  not  more 
than  one-half  of  the  latter  remained  there  longer  than  a 
few  days.5 

These  were  good  signs  for  the  friends  of  the  New  Poor 
Law,  and,  to  use  Carlyle’s  sarcastic  comments  on  the  Re¬ 
ports  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  “  a  pleasure  to  the 
friend  of  humanity  ”. 

1  See  First  Annual  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners  for  Eng¬ 
land  and  Wales,  1835,  pp.  35-36. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  26. 

3  See  Third  Annual  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  etc.,  1837. 

4  See  Second  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  etc.,  1836,  p.  33. 

5  See  First  Annual  Report  of  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  etc.,  p.  27. 


THE  NEW  POOR  LAW 


55 


One  sole  recipe  seems  to  have  been  needful  for  the  woes  of 
England :  “  refusal  of  out-door  relief  England  lay  in  sick 
discontent,  writhing  powerless  on  its  fever-bed,  dark,  nigh  des¬ 
perate,  in  wastefulness,  want,  improvidence  and  eating  care,  till 
like  Hyperion  down  the  eastern  steeps,  the  Poor  Law  Com¬ 
missioners  arose,  and  said,  Let  there  be  workhouses,  and  bread 
of  affliction  and  water  of  affliction  there !  It  was  a  simple  in¬ 
vention  ;  as  all  truly  great  inventions  are.  And  see,  in  any 
quarter,  instantly  as  the  walls  of  the  workhouse  arise,  misery 
and  necessity  fly  away,  out  of  sight, — out  of  being,  as  is  fondly 
hoped — and  dissolve  into  the  inane;  industry,  frugality,  fertil¬ 
ity,  rise  of  wages ;  peace  on  earth  and  good  will  towards  men 
do,  —  in  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners’  Reports, — infallibly, 
rapidly  or  not  so  rapidly,  to  the  joy  of  all  parties,  supervene.1 


The  effects  of  the  new  measure  were  more  or  less  dis¬ 
guised  by  the  general  condition  of  prosperity.  Before  long, 
however,  they  emerged  to  the  surface.  The  crisis  of  1836 
and  the  series  of  bad  harvests  that  followed  it  ushered  in  a 
period  of  the  most  abject  misery.  The  notorious  Irish 
famine  and  the  distress  in  the  highlands  (Scotland)  could 
not  but  augment  the  universal  penury.  After  the  crop  of  1836 
had  been  entirely  cut  off,  the  inhabitants  of  the  highlands 
and  the  islands  were  left  without  potatoes,  their  staple  article 
of  food,  almost  at  the  beginning  of  winter.  The  grain  crops 
could  not  ripen  because  of  the  general  wetness  of  the  soil, 
while  those  which  partially  did  ripen  were  destroyed  by  the 
severe  autumn  gales  and  were  rendered  entirely  useless  even 
for  the  cattle.  It  was  reported,  with  the  fear  of  being  rather 
“  under  the  mark  than  of  overshooting  it  ”,  that  two-thirds 
of  the  population  “  are  now,  or  will  be  long  before  the  com¬ 
mencement  of  the  next  crop,  without  a  supply  of  either  kind 
of  food  at  home,  and  will  have  to  look  to  foreign  sources  to 


1  Thomas  Carlyle,  Chartism ,  London,  1840,  p.  16. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


prevent  starvation.”  1  The  official  report  of  the  Agent- 
General  for  Emigration,  dated  July  29,  1837,  stated  expli¬ 
citly  that,  owing  to  the  decline  of  the  fisheries  and  the  break¬ 
ing  up  of  the  kelp  trade,  by  which  the  bulk  of  the  population 
lived,  the  majority  of  the  people  had  become  “a  clear  super¬ 
fluity  in  the  country.”  2 

This  superfluity  of  human  beings  had  to  emigrate  from 
their  native  places  in  order  to  avoid  starvation.  Ireland,  in 
the  judgment  of  the  commissioners  of  1836,  was  one  great 
lazarhouse,  and  the  Irish  poor  crossed  over  in  crowds  to 
England,  congested  every  large  town,  or  rambled  over  the 
country,  offering  their  services  on  any  terms  which  might 
induce  manufacturer  or  farmer  to  employ  them.  Emigra¬ 
tion  also  became  a  prominent  feature  among  the  English 
peasantry.  Man  hunted  for  a  refuge  from  the  lurking 
enemy — hunger.  Goaded  on  by  the  illusion  that  clings  to  dis¬ 
tant  places,  people  abandoned  their  hovels  and  turned 
nomads.  The  characteristic  attributed  by  Adam  Smith  to 
man  as  being  “of  all  sorts  of  luggage  the  most  difficult  to  be 
transported,”  which  was  strikingly  true  even  as  late  as  1837, 
changed,  as  if  by  magic,  under  the  severe  economic  pres¬ 
sure  of  the  subsequent  year.  In  his  report  to  the  Secretary 
of  State  for  the  Colonies,  the  Agent-General  for  Emigra¬ 
tion  from  the  United  Kingdom  relates  that  Dr.  Galloway 
had  to  travel  over  a  considerable  part  of  Wiltshire,  Dorset¬ 
shire,  Hampshire,  and  the  eastern  part  of  Sussex,  in  order 
to  secure  a  sufficient  number  of  passengers  for  a  small  public 


1  Distress  in  the  Highlands  ('Scotland).  A  letter  addressed  to  Mr. 
Fox  Maule  by  Mr.  Robert  Graham,  and  communicated  by  Lord  John 
Russell’s  direction  to  the  Commissioners  of  Her  Majesty’s  Treasury. 
London,  1837;  pp.  1-2. 

2  Report  of  the  Agent-General  for  Emigration  on  Applicability  of 
Emigration  to  Relieve  Distress  in  the  Highlands ,  dated  July  29,  1837, 
London,  1841,  p.  1. 


THE  NEW  POOR  LAW 


57 


57] 

vessel  which  sailed  in  June,  1837.  In  the  autumn  of  the 
same  year  a  vessel  was  allotted  to  the  county  of  Norfolk, 
but  the  whole  party,  with  the  exception  of  only  three  fami¬ 
lies,  changed  their  minds  at  the  last  moment.  Circum¬ 
stances  were  much  changed  in  1838.  The  government 
agents  found  no  difficulty  whatsoever  in  filling  four  ships 
from  the  county  of  Kent  alone,  and  many  applicants  had 
to  be  rejected  for  want  of  room.1  Emigration  filled  all 
channels  and  especially  those  leading  to  the  industrial  cen¬ 
tres,  which  before  long  inevitably  became  infested  with  the 
most  noisome  quarters. 

In  the  very  center  of  Glasgow, — writes  the  superintendent  of 
the  police  of  that  city, — there  is  an  accumulated  mass  of  squalid 
wretchedness.  .  .  .  There  is  concentrated  everything  that  is 
wretched,  dissolute,  loathsome  and  pestilential.  These  places 
are  filled  by  a  population  of  many  thousands  of  miserable 
creatures.  The  houses  in  which  they  live  are  unfit  even  for 
sties  .  .  .  dunghills  lie  in  the  vicinity  of  the  dwellings;  and 
from  the  extremely  defective  sewerages,  filth  of  every  kind 
constantly  accumulates.2 

In  1837  one-tenth  of  the  Manchester  and  one-seventh  of 
the  Liverpool  population  lived  in  cellars,  and  most  of  them 
in  courts  with  only  one  outlet.3  In  Bury,  the  population 
of  which  was  20,000,  the  dwellings  of  3,000  families  of 
workingmen  were  visited-  In  773  of  these  dwellings  the 
families  slept  three  and  four  in  one  bed;  in  sixty-seven, 
five  and  six  slept  in  one  bed,  and  in  fifteen  one  bed  ac¬ 
commodated  six  and  seven  persons.4  In  Bolton  there 

1  Report  to  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Colonies,  from  the  Agent- 
General  for  Emigration  from  the  United  Kingdom,  1838,  p.  6. 

2  Hansard,  op.  cit .,  1843,  vol.  lxvii,  p.  69. 

8  Ibid.,  1838,  vol.  xxxix,  p.  383. 

4  Ibid.,  1840,  vol.  li,  p.  1226. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


were,  in  1840,  1,126  houses  untenanted.  In  one  case, 
seventeen  persons  were  found  in  a  dwelling  about  five 
yards  square.  In  another,  eight  persons,  two  pairs 
of  looms  and  two  beds  were  found  in  a  cellar,  four 
by  five  yards,  and  six  feet  under  the  ground.1  In 
Rochdale,  five-sixths  of  the  population  had  scarcely  a  blan¬ 
ket  among  them.2  The  chief  commissioner  of  the  police 
force  in  Manchester  stated  that  in  one  room,  totally  desti¬ 
tute  of  furniture,  three  men  and  two  women  were  found 
lying  on  the  floor,  without  straw,  and  with  bricks  for  their 
pillows.  The  stipendiary  magistrate  of  the  Thames  Police 
Office  reported  similar  observations.  The  descriptions  of 
dwelling  houses  “  with  broken  panes  in  every  window- 
frame,  and  filth  and  vermin  in  every  nook,  with  walls  black 
with  the  smoke  of  foul  chimneys,  with  corded  bed-stocks  for 
beds,  without  water/’ 3  appears  less  shocking  in  comparison 
with  the  statements  made  by  other  witnesses.  The  dwellings 
in  the  rural  districts  were  even  worse  than  those  in  the  cities. 
In  one  place  a  father,  mother,  married  daughter  with  her 
husband,  a  blind  boy  of  sixteen,  a  baby,  and  two  girls,  all 
occupied  one  room.4  In  another  place  a  man  of  about 
sixty  years  of  age  was  found  living  in  a  cow  stable,  without 
windows,  floor,  or  ceiling,  where  the  rain  dripped  through 
the  rotten  roof,  and  dung-heaps  lay  near  his  door. 


1  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  lviii,  pp.  31-32. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  lix,  p.  635. 

3  Report  on  the  Sanitary  Condition  of  the  Laboring  Population  of 
Great  Britain,  London,  1842,  pp.  133-135. 

4  Hansard,  vol.  lxxiii,  pp.  882-884. 


CHAPTER  IV 


Child,  is  thy  father  dead? — 

Father  is  gone: 

Why  did  they  tax  his  bread? — 

God’s  will  be  done. — 

Mother  has  sold  her  bed, 

Better  to  die  than  wed; 

Where  shall  she  lay  her  head? — 
Home  she  has  none. 

— Ebenezer  Elliott. 

The  Universal  Distress 

The  appalling  living  conditions  of  the  poor  was  the  im¬ 
mediate  result  of  the  general  unemployment  that  prevailed 
in  all  parts  of  the  country.-  The  hand-loom  weavers  were 
the  first  victims  of  the  depression  of  trade.  As  early  as 
April  23,  1837,  the  Manchester  Times  recorded  that  “  the 
distress  has  now  reached  the  working  classes.  In  this  town 
and  its  neighborhood,  many  of  the  factories  are  working 
only  four  days  a  week,  and  some  thousands  of  hand-loom 
weavers  have  been  discharged  The  investigation  made 
by  the  government  showed  that  during  the  winter  of  1837- 
1838  an  almost  unprecedented  number  of  looms  had  been 
thrown  into  disuse  not  only  in  Manchester,  but  also  in 
Spitalfields  and  other  manufacturing  centers.1  Another 
commissioner  reported  that  the  applicants  for  relief  were 
mostly  able-bodied  men  with  families,  and  widows  with 
children,  all  of  whom  were  driven  to  seek  parish  assistance 

1  Report  by  Mr.  Hickson  on  the  Condition  of  the  Hand-Loom  Weav¬ 
ers,  Presented  to  Parliament  by  Her  Majesty's  Command,  1840,  p.  4. 

.59]  59 


60  the  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [6o 

through  lack  of  employment.1  Dr.  Kay’s  Report  of  1837 
on  the  distress  of  the  Spitalfields  weavers  stated  that 
out  of  the  14,000  looms,  one- third  were  not  used,  while 
the  remaining  number  were  only  partially  employed. 
The  manufacturers  themselves  estimated  that  the  decrease 
in  the  work  executed  amounted  to  one-half  the  quantity 
ordinarily  produced,  and  that  the  aggregate  weekly  wages 
of  the  weavers  shrank  from  £10,000  or  £12,000  to  £5,000  or 
£6,000.  The  effect  of  this  stagnation  of  trade  can  be  real¬ 
ized  when  we  bear  in  mind  that  even  at  their  best,  i.  e.  when 
employment  was  constant  and  regular,  the  weavers  were, 
according  to  the  report,  so  destitute  of  resources  that  the 
employers  had  to  advance  them  money  from  week  to  week 
to  defray  the  current  expenses  of  their  families-2  The 
wages  of  the  luckier  weavers  who  retained  their  places  were 
reduced  from  twenty-five  to  thirty  per  cent.  The  annual 
loss  to  the  poor  in  nominal  wages  in  Bolton  alone  was  esti¬ 
mated  in  1841  at  £i30,ooo.3  The  unoccupied  houses  in 
Preston  numbered  1220,  while  in  Oldham,  out  of  the  7853 
houses  and  shops,  1200  were  empty  as  a  result  of  total  or 
partial  unemployment.4 

The  industrial  depression  spread  like  a  plague  from  town 
to  town  and  from  industry  to  industry,  tightening  its  grip 
on  England  for  more  than  half  a  decade.  In  Birmingham 
the  labor  aristocracy,  the  iron  workers  began  to  feel  the 

1  Report  by  Edward  Gulson,  respecting  Nottingham ,  to  Poor  Law 
Commissioners,  18 37,  p.  7. 

*  James  Ph.  Kay,  Report ,  Relative  to  the  Distress  Prevalent  among 
the  Spitalfields  Weavers ,  to  the  Poor  Law  Commissioners,  London, 
1837,  pp.  1-2.  On  the  want  of  employment  of  the  hand-loom  weavers  in 
Scotland,  see  Assistant  Hand-loom  Weavers'  Commissioners'  Report 
of  1839,  pp.  8-9. 

3  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  lviii,  p.  31. 

4  Ibid.,  pp.  593-594- 


THE  UNIVERSAL  DISTRESS 


61 


61] 

pinch  of  bad  times  in  the  early  part  of  1837.  In  March 
of  that  year  a  deputation  submitted  to  Lord  Melbourne  a 
memorial,  signed  by  “  merchants,  manufacturers  and  other 
inhabitants  ”  of  Birmingham,  in  which  “  the  serious  and 
immediate  attention  of  His  Majesty’s  Government  ”  was 
solicited  to  the  “  general  state  of  difficulty  and  embarrass¬ 
ment,  threatening  the  most  alarming  consequences  to  all 
classes  of  the  community  The  government  was  advised 
that  “  unless  remedial  measures  be  immediately  applied,  a 
large  proportion  of  our  population  will  shortly  be  thrown 
out  of  employment  ”.1  The  laissez-faire  policy,  however, 
was  not  abandoned,  and  no  serious  attempt  was  made  to  j 
save  the  situation,  with  the  result  that  by  the  end  of  1842 
there  was  hardly  a  single  industry  which  was  not  in  a 
critical  state.2  Archibald  Prentice  testifies  that  in  1841 
there  were  20,936  persons  in  Leeds,  “  whose  average  earn-  1 
ings  were  only  elevenpence  three-farthings  a  week.  In 
Paisley,  nearly  one-fourth  of  the  population  was  in  a  state 
bordering  upon  actual  starvation.  In  one  district,  in  Man¬ 
chester,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Beardsall  visited  258  families,  con¬ 
sisting  of  1029  individuals,  whose  average  earnings  were 
only  sevenpence  halfpenny  per  head  per  week.”  3 

The  agricultural  districts  could  by  no  means  boast  of 
better  conditions.  The  investigation  of  the  state  of  three 
typical  families  of  husbandmen  in  the  union  of  Ampthill 
revealed  that  the  means  of  living  had  been  reduced,  in 
money,  from  is.  8d.  a  head  per  week  in  1834  to  is.  2^d.  in 
1837,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  work  of  these  hus¬ 
bandmen  had  been  increased  from  an  aggregate  of  39  weeks 

1  Bronterre’s  National  Reformer,  March  18,  1837. 

2  See  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  lix,  p.  636,  and  vol.  lxiii,  p.  1128. 

3  Archibald  Prentice,  History  of  the  Anti-Corn  Law  League,  London, 
1853,  vol.  i,  p.  270. 


62  THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [62 

in  1834  to  142  in  1837.  Moreover,  this  does  not  tell  the 
whole  story.  The  command  that  money  had  over  bread  in 
these  two  years  must  be  taken  into  consideration.  The 
average  price  of  wheat  in  1834  was  46s.  2d.  per  quarter, 
while  in  1837  it  reached  55s.  9d.  The  purchasing  power 
of  the  earnings  of  the  three  families  (which  in  1834  and 
1837  numbered  17  and  21  souls  respectively)  was  32  quar¬ 
ters  of  wheat,  or  i8^>  pints  per  week  for  each  person  in 
1834;  whereas  in  1837  their  income  could  purchase  only 
23^4  quarters  of  wheat,  i.  e.,  11  pints  per  week  for  each  per¬ 
son.  In  other  words,  the  actual  wages  fell  41  per  cent  in 
comparison  with  the  wages  in  1834  which  even  then  were 
far  from  adequate  for  a  decent  livelihood.1  The  invests 
gation  of  the  state  of  forty-eight  families  of  husband¬ 
men  of  the  Ampthill  union  whose  employment  had  been 
irregular,  showed,  that,  notwithstanding  the  760  weeks 
more  work  done  in  1837  than  in  1834,  they  suffered 
a  reduction  in  their  weekly  money  income  per  head 
of  from  is.  ioj/^d.  during  1834  to  is.  6d.  in  1837, 
or  20  per  cent  in  nominal  wages,  and  in  the  purchasing 
power  of  the  latter  expressed  in  wheat,  a  weekly  reduction 
from  20^4  pints  per  head  in  1834  to  13J4  pints  per 
head  in  1837,  or  a  net  reduction  of  34  per  cent.2  The  sur¬ 
vey  of  thirty  families  of  the  same  union,  whose  employment 
in  husbandry  had  been  regular  during  the  years  1834-1837, 
revealed  a  similar  result.  The  average  weekly  reduction  in 
their  actual  wages,  expressed  in  terms  of  wheat,  fell  from 
23  1 -10  pints  to  17  3-10  pints  per  head,  while  the  reduc¬ 
tion  of  the  income  of  ten  of  these  families  reached  32  per 

1  See  Twenty-third  Report  front  the  Select  Committee  on  the  Poor 
Law  Amendment  Aot,  London,  1838,  appendix  B,  pp.  34-35. 

2 'See  Twenty-sixth  and  Twenty-seventh  Reports  from  the  Select 
Committee  on  the  Poor  Law  Amendment  Act ,  London,  1838,  appendix 
A,  pp.  44-45. 


THE  UNIVERSAL  DISTRESS 


cent,  and  one  family  numbering  seven  persons  had  to  subsist 
on  only  i  J^d.,  i.  e.,  i  3-10  pints  of  wheat  per  day.1 

The  Whigs  came  into  power  pledged  to  reforms  which 
they  could  hardly  accomplish.  The  campaign  for  the  Re¬ 
form  Bill  of  1832  carried  with  it  a  promise  for  the  repeal 
of  the  Corn  Laws  which  had  been  condemned  as  fostering 
the  monopoly  of  landowners.  On  his  death-bed,  Jeremy 
Bentham  rejoiced  that  the  Reform  Bill  would  assure  the 
triumph  of  free-trade.  In  spite  of  their  pledges,  however, 
and  in  spite  of  the  many  petitions  in  favor  of  the  repeal 
of  the  Corn  Laws,  the  reform  Parliament  and  the  reform 
ministers  put  up  the  “  not-the-time  "  plea  and  energetically 
fought  such  repeal.  Instead  of  ameliorating  the  condition 
of  the  poor,  the  government  continued  its  laissez-faire 
policy,  and  allowed  the  misery  of  the  working  class  to  be 
exceedingly  aggravated  by  the  relentless  rise  of  prices  of 
wheat. 


Table  I 


Year.  Price  of  Wheat  per  Quarter. 

1836  .  39s.  5 

1837  .  52J.  6d. 

1838  .  5Ss.  3d.  - 

1839  .  69^.  4 d. 

1840  .  68s.  6d.  y 


The  value  of  the  imported  wheat  in  1836  was  0.1  per  cent 
of  the  whole  import  of  Great  Britain,  whereas  in  1839  wheat 
was  twenty  per  cent  of  the  entire  value  of  imports,  reaching 


1  Twenty-sixth  and  Twenty-seventh  Reports,  op.  cit .,  appendix  B,  pp. 
46-47.  Concerning  the  condition  of  six  laborers  in  other  parishes  of 
the  same  union,  see  Twenty-eighth  Report  from  the  Select  Committee 
on  the  Poor  Law  Amendment  Act,  London,  1838,  appendix,  pp.  24-25. 
The  subsequent  Reports  of  the  Committee  endeavored  to  weaken  the 
impression  produced  by  the  former  Reports,  and  sophisticated  methods 
were  employed  to  discredit  not  only  the  conclusions  but  even  the 
veracity  of  Mr.  Turner,  a  former  member  of  the  Committee. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


a  sum  never  exceeded  before  (£10.5  million).  This  rise  in 
the  price  of  wheat  taxed  the  working  population  of  Bolton, 
for  instance,  as  much  as  £195,000,  which  together  with  the 
reduction  in  wages  amounted  to  a  net  loss  of  £325,000/  It 
goes  without  saying  that  this  sudden  rise  in  the  price  of 
wheat,  due  primarily  to  the  high  import  duties,  at  the  time 
of  a  well-nigh  universal  state  of  unemployment,  robbed 
many  families  of  the  bare  necessities  of  life.  In  one  case  a 
man  was  seen  standing  over  a  swill  tub,  into  which  was 
thrown  the  wash  for  the  pigs,  and  taking  several  pieces 
out  and  eating  them  with  a  voracious  appetite.1 2  A  farmer 
testified  that  about  twenty  females  from  Crompton  and 
Shaw,  near  Oldham,  begged  him  to  allow  them  to  disinter 
the  body  of  a  cow  which  had  been  buried  a  day  and  a  half. 
Upon  his  permission  the  women  “  disinterred  the  body,  cut 
it  into  pieces,  took  it  to  their  respective  families,  who  not 
only  ate  heartily  of  the  carrion,  but  declared  the  meat  to  be 
the  best  they  had  tasted  for  many  months  past  ”.3 

In  Johnstone  mothers  were  witnessed  who  divided  a 
farthing  salt  herring  and  a  half -penny worth  of  potatoes 
among  a  family  of  seven;  others  mixed  sawdust  with  oat¬ 
meal  in  making  their  porridge,  to  enable  each  to  have  a 
mouthful,  while  still  other  families  lived  for  ten  days  on 
beans  and  peas  and  ears  of  wheat  stolen  from  the  neigh¬ 
boring  fields.4  Children  wrangled  with  one  another  in  the 
streets  for  the  offal  which  well-to-do  people  did  not  allow 
their  dogs  to  eat.  Starving  families  seized  the  vilest  sub¬ 
stances  which  could  protract  for  a  few  hours  their  miserable 
existence.  Half-dressed  wretches  crowded  together  to  save 


1  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  lviii,  p.  31;  vol.  lxiii,  p.  1125. 

2  Ibid.,  vol.  lviii,  p.  595. 

3  Ibid.  See  also  affidavit  to  the  same  effect  in  vol.  lxiii,  p.  26. 

4  Ibid.,  vol.  lix,  p.  759. 


THE  UNIVERSAL  DISTRESS 


themselves  from  the  pain  of  cold.  Several  women  were 
found  in  the  middle  of  the  day  imprisoned  in  one  bed  under 
a  blanket,  because  as  many  others  who  had  on  their  backs 
all  the  articles  of  dress  that  belonged  to  the  party  were  out 
of  doors.1  Colonel  T.  P.  Thompson,  describing  in  the  Sun 
the  distress  he  witnessed  in  Bolton  in  1841,  says: 


I  think  I  know  what  is  the  minimum  of  help  by  which  horse, 
ass,  dog,  hog  or  monkey  can  sustain  existence,  and  where  it 
must  go  out  for  want  of  appliance  and  means  of  living.  But 
anything  like  the  squalid  misery,  the  slow,  moulding,  putrify- 
ing  death  by  which  the  weak  and  the  feeble  of  the  working 
classes  are  perishing  here,  it  never  befel  my  eyes  to  behold, 
nor  my  imagination  to  conceive.2 

Such  conditions  being  the  rule  and  not  the  exception, 
there  is  little  wonder  that  various  diseases  took  root  in  the 
poor  quarters  and  became  the  scourge  of  all  industrial 
cities.  Consumption  and  febrile  diseases  of  a  malignant  and 
fatal  character,  together  with  plagues,  prevailed  in  almost 
every  house,  and  raised  the  mortality  of  the  population  to  a 
point  threatening  almost  racial  extermination.  The  Reports 
of  the  Sanitary  Condition  of  the  Laboring  Population  of 
England,  as  well  as  the  Parliamentary  Reports ,  contain  an 
amazing  mass  of  evidence  to  that  effect.  In  Liverpool,  for 
example,  the  average  longevity  of  the  gentry  and  profes¬ 
sionals  in  1840  was  35  years;  that  of  business  men  and 
skilled  mechanics,  22  years,  while  that  of  day-laborers,  oper¬ 
atives,  etc.,  was  only  15  years.  The  variation  of  mortality 
in  different  districts  of  the  metropolis  in  1838  amounted, 
according  to  the  first  annual  report  of  the  registrar-general, 
to  100  per  cent.  The  report  of  one  of  the  medical  officers 

1  Report  on  Sanitary  Condition  of  the  Laboring  Population  of  Great 
Britain,  1842,  p.  24. 

2  Quoted  by  Archibald  Prentice,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  270. 


66 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[66 

stated  explicitly  that  the  dwelling  condition  in  Liverpool 
was  the  source  of  many  diseases,  “  particularly  catarrh, 
rheumatic  affections,  and  tedious  cases  of  typhus  mitior , 
which,  owing  to  the  overcrowded  state  of  the  apartment, 
occasionally  pass  into  typhus  graroior  The  cellars  es¬ 
pecially  became  hot-beds  of  epidemic  diseases.  In  1837 
the  same  medical  officer  attended  “  a  family  of  thirteen, 
twelve  of  whom  had  typhus  fever,  without  a  bed  in  the 
cellar,  without  straw  or  timber  shavings — frequent  substi¬ 
tutes.  They  lay  on  the  floor,  and  so  crowded,  that  I  could 
scarcely  pass  between  them  In  another  house,  fourteen 
patients  were  found  lying  on  boards,  and  during  their  illness, 
had  never  removed  their  clothes.1  Nassau  W.  Senior  testi¬ 
fied  that  he  had  found  in  Manchester  a  whole  street  follow¬ 
ing  the  course  of  a  ditch,  because  in  this  way  deeper  cellars 
could  be  had  without  the  cost  of  digging,  and  that  not  a 
single  house  of  that  street  had  escaped  the  cholera.2  The 
extent  of  the  spread  of  diseases  in  industrial  centers  can 
be  realized  from  the  fact  that  the  total  number  of  patients 
admitted  to  the  dispensaries  in  the  Manchester  district  dur¬ 
ing  the  six  years  ending  in  1836  was  54,000,  whereas  the 
total  number  of  those  admitted  during  the  six  years  of  dear 
food  ending  in  1841  reached  169,000, — an  increase  of  over 
200  per  cent.3 

The  opponents  of  the  New  Poor  Law  pointed  out  repeat¬ 
edly  that  the  new  measure  would  propagate  crime. 
Cobbett  was  particularly  emphatic  on  this  point.  Robbery, 
murder  and  violence  would  become  a  matter  of  dire  neces- 

1  See  Report  on  the  Handloom  Weavers,  1841,  vol.  x,  p.  350;  cf.  also 
Report  on  the  Sanitary  Condition  of  the  Laboring  Population  of  Great 
Britain,  1842,  pp.  17-25. 

2  Nassau  W.  Senior,  Letters  on  the  Factory  Act  to  the  Rt.  Hon.  the 
President  of  the  Board  of  Trade,  London,  1837,  p.  24. 

3  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  lxiii,  p.  1124. 


THE  UNIVERSAL  DISTRESS 


sity,  prophesied  he.1  “  What  remains  for  the  laborer  but 
plunder?” — protested  another. — “There  is  no  law  for  a 
starving  man — there  is  no  tie  of  conscience  or  principle 
binding  on  a  famished  wretch  who  hears  a  wife  and  chil¬ 
dren  clamorous  for  food.”  2  The  prophecies  soon  became 
facts.  Offenses  of  the  most  heinous  nature  spread  with 
epidemic  rapidity  over  the  whole  country  and  especially  in 
the  manufacturing  districts.  The  total  expense  for  suppres¬ 
sion  of  crime  in  1841  amounted  to  the  enormous  sum  of 
£604,165,  the  expense  for  a  single  convict  being  equal  to  the 
cost  of  education  of  one  hundred  and  seventeen  children. 
The  loss  by  plunder  at  Liverpool  alone  amounted  in  that 
year  to  £700, 000. 3  The  progress  of  crime  can  be  seen 
from  the  following  table  :4 


Table  II 


Population  of 

%  of  In- 

Number  of 

Proportion  of 

%  of  In- 

Year 

England 

crease  each 

commit- 

commitments 

crease  each 

and  Wales 

year 

ments 

to  population 

years 

1806  . 

14,909,000 

| 

j  20,984 

1  in  710 

1837 . 

15,105,000 

i-3 

23,612 

1  in  639 

12.5 

1838 . 

I5*3°7>00° 

i-3 

|  23,094 

1  in  662 

— 2.1 

1839  . 

15,511,000 

i*3 

24,443 

1  in  634 

5.8 

1840  . 

15,718,000 

i-3 

27,187 

1  in  578 

1 1.2 

1841  . 

15,927,000 

1.3 

27,760 

1  in  673 

2.1 

1842  . 

16,141,000 

i-3 

3I>3°9 

1  in  516 

12.8 

Total  increase 

during  period 

1,232,000 

8-3 

10,325 

49.2 

1  Hansard,  vol.  xxiv,  p.  1052. 

2  George  Stephen,  Letter  to  the  Rt.  Hon.  Lord  John  Russell  on  the 
Probable  Increase  of  Rural  Crime,  London,  1836,  p.  4. 

3  Hansard,  vol.  lxvii,  p.  66. 

4  See  Official  Report  of  1846,  no.  460,  in  vol.  xxv.  The  increase  of 
population  as  deduced  from  Census  returns  is  even  smaller.  Thus, 
according  to  the  Census  reports,  the  total  population  in  1836  was  14,- 
758,000,  and  in  1842,  15,981,000 — an  increase  of  12,000  less  than  in  our 
table. 


68 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[68 

Of  the  commitments  of  1842  not  less  than  8,591,  or 
nearly  28  per  cent,  were  made  in  the  two  manufacturing- 
districts  of  Lancashire  and  Middlesex,  including  London, 
although  the  population  of  those  districts  was  far  from 
constituting  such  a  large  percentage  of  the  total.  The  offi¬ 
cial  report  of  Lancashire  showed  that  the  increase  of  crime 
in  that  district  was  nearly  six  times  as  great  as  that  of  the 
population. 

The  Poor  Law  Commissioners  could  boast  of  the  effect 
of  their  measures  which  brought  about  an  annual  average 
saving  of  a  couple  of  millions  in  the  expenditures  for  poor 
relief.  But  England  paid  too  high  a  price  for  these  sterling 
pounds  by  forcing  multitudes  of  people  into  the  “  bastiles  ”. 
The  wretchedness  of  the  situation  can  be  gauged  from  the 
growing  number  of  workhouse  inmates  as  shown  in  the  fol¬ 
lowing  table.  Bearing  in  mind  that  nothing  but  actual  star¬ 
vation  could  force  the  people  to  entetr  the  relief-prisons,  such 
an  increase  tells  a  sorry  tale.  Within  five  years  the  work- 
house  population  of  England  and  Wales  almost  doubled. 


Table  111 1 


Year 

Persons  in 
receipt  of 
outdoor 
relief 

Cumulative 
Increase 
during  the 
period 

Cumula* 

tive 

per  cent 
of  increase 

Persons 
in  work- 
houses 

Cumulative 
Increase 
during  the 
period 

Cumulative 
per  cent  of 
increase 

Difference 
in  the  per 
cent  of 
increase 

1839.. .. 

1 840 .. .. 

1841 .. .. 

1842. .  . . 

1843.. .. 

007  non 

IAO.OOO 

yy  / 

1,030,000 

1,108,000 

1,196,000 

1,300,000 

33, OOO 
111,000 
199,000 
303,000 

3-3 

1 1 .0 

20.0 

30-3 

:l69,O0O 

192,000 

223,000 

239,000 

29,000 

52,000 

83,000 

99,000 

20.7 

37-° 

59-3 

70.7 

17.4 
26.0 

39-3 

40.4 

Table  III  shows  clearly  that  while  the  stringent  adminis¬ 
trators  of  the  New  Poor  Law  began  to  discern  the  hand- 


1  This  table  is  constructed  on  the  basis  of  data  given  in  Hansard, 
op.  cit .,  vol.  lxv,  p.  367,  vol.  lxvi,  pp.  1178-1179,  and  in  George  Nichols’ 
History  of  the  English  Poor  Law,  London,  1854,  vol.  ii,  p.  375. 


THE  UNIVERSAL  DISTRESS 


writing  on  the  wall  and  granted  out-door  relief  to  a  greater 
number  of  applicants  than  immediately  after  the  introduc¬ 
tion  of  the  new  measure,  their  ideal  means  of  succor  was 
still  the  workhouse.  And  all  this  in  face  of  the  universal 
indignation  which  was  manifested  throughout  the  whole 
country.  There  is  no  wonder,  then,  that  Tory  politicians, 
as  well  as  radical  friends  of  labor,  were  remorseless  in 
their  denunciation  of  both  the  Whigs  and  their  New  Poor 
Law.  The  hatred  displayed  by  the  Tories  was  nurtured  by 
their  instinctive  fear  of  the  newly-formed  capitalist  class 
which  began  to  assert  its  power  in  quite  an  arrogant  way. 
But  it  was  this  very  acquisition  of  power  by  the  middle  class 
that  caused  the  apprehension  of  the  radicals.  Their  name 
was  legion  who  believed  with  Bronterre,  even  as  early  as 
1837,  that  the  object  of  the  New  Poor  Law  was  to  reduce 
labor  “  to  the  lowest  rate  of  remuneration  at  which  exist¬ 
ence  can  be  sustained  ”.  The  new  class  was  pictured  as  a 
band  of  “  the  greatest  tyrants  over  the  people  ”,  since  “  the 
most  formidable,  as  well  as  the  most  remorseless  of  all 
despotisms,  is  the  despotism  of  money  T1 

The  last  session  of  Parliament  in  1838  was  bombarded 
with  petitions  bearing  the  signatures  of  269,000  persons 
who  requested  the  repeal  of  the  new  measure,  whereas  only 
thirty-five  petitions  with  952  signatures  were  presented  in 
favor  of  retention  of  the  New  Poor  Law.  The  people  felt 
themselves  outraged  and  expressed  their  resentment  at 
public  meetings,  some  of  which  were  attended  by  crowds 
whose  numbers  were  estimated  at  300, 000. 2  The  Whigs, 
however,  were  not  to  be  daunted,  and  the  party  in  power 
continued  to  remain  brutally  heedless  to  the  desperate  cry 
of  millions  of  men  and  women. 


1  See  Bronterre’s  National  Reformer ,  January  28,  Feb.  11  and  March 

18,  1837. 

2  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xli,  1838,  pp.  1005-1006. 


CHAPTER  V 


Call  Chartism  by  what  name  you 
will,  its  principles  have  sprung  from 
the  infant  blood  of  English  children; 
and  though  you  water  them  with  the 
blood  of  millions,  yet,  by  the  God  who 
made  us  all  equal,  I  swear  that  I  will 
take  the  little  children,  their  fathers, 
and  their  mothers,  out  of  your  toils 
and  grasp,  or  die  in  the  attempt! 

— Feargus  O’Connor. 

Labor  Legislation  and  Trade  Unionism 

The  working  class  was  keenly  disappointed  in  the 
Whigs  for  their  hostile  attitude  towards  labor  legislation. 
It  was  the  ultra  Tories,  Richard  Oastler,  Michael  Thomas 
Sadler  and  Lord  Ashley  1  who  led  the  campaign  against  the 

1  Richard  Oastler  (1789-1861),  the  “king  of  the  factory  children,” 
was  a  Tory  and  an  advocate  of  the  abolition  of  slavery  in  the  West 
Indies.  He  led  the  agitation  for  the  ten-hour  day  ffom  1830  on¬ 
wards.  In  1830  he  began  his  series  of  fiery  letters  to  the  Leeds  Mer¬ 
cury,  and  afterwards  to  the  Leeds  Intelligencer,  on  the  “Yorkshire 
Slavery.”  He  vigorously  opposed  the  New  Poor  Law,  and  was  im¬ 
prisoned  for  debt  in  1840;  the  Whigs  repeatedly  offered  to  pay  his 
debt  and  confer  other  favors  upon  him  if  he  would  give  up  his  agita¬ 
tion  against  the  Poor  Laws.  He  refused  to  make  any  deal  with  his 
conscience,  and  for  three  years  remained  in  prison,  whence  he  pub¬ 
lished  his  Fleet  Papers,  in  which  he  incessantly  urged  the  need  of  fac¬ 
tory  reform  and  the  abolition  of  the  Poor  Laws. 

Michael  Thomas  Sadler  (1780-1835),  Tory,  philanthropist  and  writer 
on  political  economy,  introduced  a  bill  for  restricting  child  labor  in 
1831.  He  was  chairman  of  the  Select  Committee  appointed  to  inquire 
into  the  condition  of  the  children  employed  in  factories,  and  his  solic- 
70  [70 


yi]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM  71 

evils  of  the  factory  system  and  demanded  the  amelioration 
of  workmen’s  conditions.  The  Short  Time  Committee  was 
justly  described  as  a  curious  “  combination  of  Socialists, 
Chartists  and  ultra  Tories  ”,x  but  the  Whig  representatives 
were  at  all  times  conspicuous  by  their  absence  from  among 
those  who  fought  the  people’s  battle.2 

The  fight  was  forced  on  the  advocates  of  labor  legisla¬ 
tion  by  the  condition  of  the  men,  women  and  children  who 
were  employed  in  factories.  It  started  at  the  time  when 
the  employers’  demand  for  freedom  of  contract  was  in  com¬ 
plete  harmony  with  the  laissez-faire  doctrine  of  the  econo¬ 
mists.  This  doctrine  proclaimed  it  a  “  natural  law  ”  that 
employers  and  employees  should  be  allowed  to  make  what 
arrangements  they  pleased  between  themselves,  without  in¬ 
terference  on  the  part  of  the  government.  It  required  a 
kind  of  philosophical  courage,  besides  a  warm  feeling  for 
the  exploited,  to  oppose  the  then  prevailing  notions  of 
social  justice.  When  the  Ten-Hour  Movement  grew 
stronger,  the  ethical  and  abstract  ideas  were  left  to  take 
care  of  themselves,  and  the  opponents  of  the  movement 
began  to  promulgate  the  economic  or  commercial  argument 
for  which  Nassau  Senior  stood  sponsor.  The  whole  ques- 


itous  and  unremitting  work  was  said  to  have  been  a  contributing  cause 
to  his  premature  death. 

Anthony  Ashley  Cooper,  Lord  Ashley,  afterwards  Lord  Shaftesbury 
(1801-1885),  Tory,  became  interested  in  factory  children  in  1832  and 
introduced  a  Ten-Flour  Bill  in  1833.  He  was  the  most  zealous  advo¬ 
cate  of  labor  legislation  and  an  ardent  social  reformer. 

1  The  Leeds  Mercury,  March  23,  1844. 

2  The  most  prominent  leaders  in  the  agitation  against  child  labor,  be¬ 
sides  Oastler,  Sadler  and  Ashley,  were  the  Rev.  J.  R.  Stephens,  the 
Chartist  leader;  John  Doherty,  the  general  secretary  of  the  Federation 
of  Cotton  Spinners,  a  Chartist ;  George  Condy,  the  editor  of  the  Man¬ 
chester  and  Salford  Advertiser;  Philip  Grant;  and  later  the  radical 
Tohn  Fielden,  who  took  Lord  Ashley’s  place  during  his  temporary  re¬ 
tirement  from  the  House  in  1846. 


72 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[72 

tion  was  then  presented  from  the  point  of  view  of  economic 
expediency.  Starting  with  the  assumption  that  in  the 
cotton  manufacture  kk  the  whole  profit  is  derived  from  the 
last  hour  ”,  and  that  “  if  the  hours  of  working  were  reduced 
by  one  hour  per  day,  net  profit  would  be  destroyed ;  if  they 
were  reduced  by  an  hour  and  a  half,  even  gross  profit  would 
be  destroyed  ”, — Senior  reached  the  ingenious  conclusion 
that  it  was  in  the  interest  of  the  working  classes  themselves 
to  oppose  the  reduction  of  the  hours  of  labor,  which  would 
be  “  attended  by  the  most  fatal  consequences  ”.  As  to  the 
exertion  and  overwork,  Senior  thought  that  the  work  of 
children  and  young  persons  in  the  cotton  mills  was  “  mere 
confinement,  attention  and  attendance  ”,  and  it  was  scarcely 
possible  to  feel  fatigue  after  “  extremely  long  hours  ”  of 
work.1 

This  last  view  of  Mr.  Senior  was,  to  say  the  least,  a  pre¬ 
posterous  denial  of  actual  conditions.  The  government  re¬ 
ports,  as  well  as  the  accounts  in  contemporary  newspapers 
and  magazines,  tell  quite  a  different  story.  Dr.  Kay,  him¬ 
self  an  opponent  of  state  interference  with  the  hours  of 
labor,  depicts  the  condition  of  the  factory  laborer  in  the 
following  lines :  “  Whilst  the  engine  runs  the  people  must 
work, — men,  women  and  children  are  yoked  together  with 
iron  and  steam.  The  animal  machine — breakable  in  the 
best  case,  subject  to  a  thousand  sources  of  suffering, — is 
chained  fast  to  the  iron  machine,  which  knows  no  suffering 
and  no  weariness.”  2  Another  opponent  of  the  factory 
act,  Mr.  Roebuck,  wrote  from  Glasgow  in  1838  that  he 
visited  a  cotton  mill  where  he  saw  a  sight  that  froze  his 
blood. 

1  Nassau  William  Senior,  Letters  on  the  Factory  Act,  London,  1837, 
pp.  12-13. 

J  James  Philip  Kay,  Moral  and  Physical  Conditions  of  the  Operatives 
Employed  in  the  Cotton  Manufacture  in  Manchester,  1832,  p.  24. 


/ 


73 


73]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM 

The  place  was  full  of  women,  young  all  of  them,  some  large 
with  child,  and  obliged  to  stand  twelve  hours  each  day.  Their 
hours  are  from  five  in  the  morning  to  seven  in  the  evening, 
two  hours  of  that  being  for  rest,  so  that  they  stand  twelve 
clear  hours.  The  heat  was  excessive  in  some  of  the  rooms, 
the  stink  pestiferous,  and  in  all  an  atmosphere  of  cotton  flue. 
I  nearly  fainted.1 

The  employment  of  women  and  children  was  attacked  by 
Ashley  and  his  followers  on  the  ground  that  it  inevitably 
breaks  up  the  family.  Of  the  419,560  factory  operatives  in 
Great  Britain  in  1839,  for  instance,  192,887,  or  46  per 
cent  were  under  eighteen  years  of  age;  the  242,296  females 
included  112,192  girls  under  eighteen  years  of  age.  Only 
96,569,  or  23  per  cent,  were  adult  male  operatives.2  Women 
were  reported  to  return  to  the  factory  three  or  four  days 
after  confinement  and  dripping  wet  with  milk  while  at  work. 

The  pestilent  atmosphere  and  the  inevitable  contact 
of  many  people  in  one  work-room  had  a  detrimental 
effect  on  the  morals  of  the  factory  employees-  In  Man¬ 
chester  three-fourths  of  such  employees  at  the  age  of 
from  fourteen  to  twenty  years  were  reported  unchaste.3 

An  estimate  of  sexual  morality, — writes  one  of  the  commis¬ 
sioners, — cannot  readily  be  reduced  to  figures ;  but  if  I  may 
trust  my  own  observations  and  the  general  opinion  of  those 
with  whom  I  have  spoken,  as  well  as  the  whole  tenor  of  the 
testimony  furnished  me,  the  aspect  of  the  influence  of  factory 
life  upon  the  morality  of  the  youthful  female  population  is 
most  depressing.4 

1  R.  E.  Leader,  Life  of  Roebuck,  quoted  by  B.  L.  Hutchins  and  A. 
Harrison  in  the  History  of  Factory  Legislation,  Westminster,  1903,  pp. 
91-92. 

2  See  Ashley’s  Speech  of  March  15,  1844,  in  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol. 
lxxiii. 

3  Cf.  Report  from  Commissioners  Appointed  to  Collect  Information 
in  the  Manufacturing  Districts,  1834,  Cowell  Evidence,  p.  57. 

4  Ibid.,  Hawkins’  Report,  p.  4. 


74 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[74 

The  report  of  the  Select  Committee  also  brought  to  light 
many  facts  in  regard  to  the  employment  of  children  in 
factories.  Children  of  five  years  of  age  were  very  few,  but 
there  was  a  considerable  number  of  six-year-old  and  a 
still  greater  number  of  seven-year-old  children;  the  great¬ 
est  number,  however,  consisted  of  children  of  from  eight 
to  nine  years  of  age.  The  working-day  frequently  lasted 
from  fourteen  to  sixteen  hours,  and  the  children  were  under 
a  cruel  discipline  of  overseers  who  enforced  authority  by 
corporal  punishment.  The  extremely  long  hours  of  work 
brought  with  them,  Mr.  Senior’s  assertion  to  the  contrary 
notwithstanding,  most  serious  consequences  not  only  from 
the  point  of  view  of  morality,  but  also  from  a  purely  physio¬ 
logical  standpoint.1  The  commissioners’  report  contains 
abundant  evidence  of  the  horrible  effect  of  the  factory  sys¬ 
tem  on  the  population.  Children  were  deformed,  often 
seized  naked  in  bed  by  overseers  and  driven  with  blows  to 
the  factory ;  women  were  made  unfit  for  child-bearing ;  men 
were  crippled ;  whole  generations  afflicted  with  disease.  It  was 
these  monstrosities  that  roused  the  friends  of  the  people  to 
exclaim  against  the  factory  system.  The  discontent  of  the 
laborers,  crude  and  sporadic  in  the  beginning  of  the  Indus¬ 
trial  Revolution,  assumed  all  the  aspects  of  social  war  which 
stratified  the  population  of  Great  Britain  with  marvelous 
rapidity.  Criminal  offenses  against  property  were  super¬ 
seded  by  strikes,  abortive  and  irresponsible  in  the  beginning, 
but  becoming  ever  more  organized  and  systematic,  as  the 
divorce  between  the  functions  and  interests  of  the  employer 
and  those  of  the  workman  became  more  inevitable  with 
each  stride  of  the  capitalist  regime. 

1  Cf.  ibid..  Dr.  Loudon  Evidence,  pp.  12,  13  and  16;  Drinkwater  Evi¬ 
dence,  pp.  72,  80,  146,  150  and  155;  Poiver  Evidence,  pp.  63  and  66-69; 
Sir  D.  Barry  Evidence,  pp.  6,  8,  13,  21,  44  and  55;  Tufnell  Evidence, 
pp.  5,  6  and  16. 


75 ]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM  75 

Attempts  at  trade  unionism  were  made  even  in  the  be¬ 
ginning  of  the  new  factory  system.  Adam  Smith  had 
already  observed  that  “  people  of  the  same  trade  seldom 
meet  together,  even  for  merriment  and  diversion,  but  the 
conversation  ends  in  conspiracy  against  the  public  or  in 
some  contrivance  to  raise  prices  ”/  There  certainly  were 
such  “  conspiracies  ”  among  the  members  of  the  working 
class.  As  early  as  1806  the  government  reported  the  ex¬ 
istence  of  some  kind  of  a  national  union  of  clothworkers 
with  a  central  committee  at  the  head.2  Benefit  clubs  and 
other  associations  were  formed  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth 
and  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  centuries  both  for  the 
purpose  of  carrying  on  parliamentary  agitation  against  the 
factory  owners  and  for  industrial  combination  and  class 
struggle.  Parliament,  of  course,  was  persistent  in  its 
laissez-faire  policy  and,  in  spite  of  the  persevering  demands 
of  the  operatives  for  a  minimum  rate  of  wages  and  a  legal 
limitation  of  the  number  of  apprentices,  the  House  of 
Commons  was  more  than  once  carried  in  the  interests  of 
members  whose  factories  swarmed  with  children.  Indus¬ 
trial  combinations  of  workmen  being  legally  forbidden  and 
severely  prosecuted  during  the  first  quarter  of  the  nine¬ 
teenth  century,  artisans  were  forced  into  a  system  of  con¬ 
spiracy  against  employers  and  of  cruel  treatment  of  non- 
unionists.  The  attempt  of  the  workingmen  at  organized 
political  agitation  against  the  Combination  Laws  was  imme¬ 
diately  crushed  by  the  notorious  “  Six  Acts  ”  of  1819. 
These  laws  suppressed  well-nigh  all  public  meetings,  im¬ 
posed  a  very  high  stamp  duty  on  all  labor  publications  and 
stringently  enforced  the  law  on  seditious  libels,  thus  exposing 
authors  or  publishers  to  the  penalty  of  banishment  from  all 

1  Wealth  of  Nations  (McCulloch’s  edition,  1863),  book  i,  chap,  x,  p.  59. 

2  See  Report  of  the  Committee  on  the  W oollen  Manufacture,  1806, 

p.  16. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


parts  of  his  Majesty's  dominion  or  of  transportation  to 
special  places,  if  anything  was  printed  which  was  not  to 
the  taste  of  the  government.  There  was,  on  the  part  of 
the  latter,  an  evident  determination  to  resort  to  nothing 
but  force.  “  They  think  of  nothing  else  ” — protested 
a  member  of  Parliament, — “  they  dream  of  nothing 
else;  they  will  try  no  means  of  conciliation;  they  will 
make  no  attempt  to  pacify  and  reconcile;  force — force — 
force — and  nothing  but  force  ”.1  Radicalism  was  repre- 
|  sented  as  a  spirit,  “  of  which  the  first  elements  are  a  rejec¬ 
tion  of  Scripture,  and  a  contempt  of  all  the  institutions  of 
your  country,  and  of  which  the  results,  unless  averted  by  a 

i  merciful  Providence,  must  be  anarchy,  atheism,  and  uni¬ 
versal  ruin  ”.2  Radicals  were  accordingly  branded  and 
treated  as  traitors.  “  Orator  ”  Hunt  and  Cobbett,  the  her¬ 
alds  of  the  English  labor  movement,  were  abused,  mal¬ 
treated,  and,  therefore,  driven  to  extremes.  Even  Francis 
Place,3  the  champion  political  wire-puller  and  labor  lobby- 

1  Tierney  in  the  House  of  Commons,  as  quoted  in  Walpole’s  History 
of  England ,  vol.  i,  pp.  516-517. 

2  Walpole’s  History  of  England,  vol.  i,  p.  426. 

8  Francis  Place  (1771-1854),  a  master  tailor,  was  the  son  of  a  brutal 
father,  who,  to  amuse  himself,  used  to  knock  his  children  down.  In 
1808  Place  became  acquainted  with  James  Mill  and  Bentham,  and  soon 
became  their  pupil,  associate,  and  friend;  with  Bentham,  he  was  on 
affectionate  terms.  In  their  letters  they  used  to  address  one  another, 
“  My  dear  old  father,”  and  “  Dear  good  boy,”  respectively.  Since  1818 
he  devoted  all  his  time  and  energy  to  the  agitation  for  the  repeal  of  the 
Combination  Laws  and  to  the  Reform  movement,  and  proved  himself 
a  remarkable  politician.  His  shop  at  Charing  Cross  was  the  center  of 
the  radicals  and  reformers,  and  his  “  Civic  Library  ”  was  a  kind  of 
rendezvous  for  members  of  Parliament  and  social  agitators  of  all 
sorts.  He  was  to  a  great  extent  responsible  for  the  diffusion  of  the 
Benthamite  ideas  among  the  English-speaking  people.  His  role  in  the 
repeal  of  the  Combination  Laws  was  that  of  an  organizer  and  political 
wire-puller.  He  was  a  great  collector  of  social,  economic  and  labor 
facts,  and  his  invaluable  manuscript  records  are  now  in  the  possession 
of  the  British  Museum.  A  not  inconsiderable  portion  of  the  economic 
tracts  collected  and  annotated  by  him  is  in  the  library  of  Professor 
Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman. 


77 


77]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM 


ist,  for  a  long  time  could  hardly  secure  a  hearing  in  Parlia¬ 
ment.  But  his  victory  in  1825,  securing  to  the  working 
class  the  right  of  collective  bargaining,  proved  mere  sec¬ 
tional  combination  ineffective  as  long  as  the  government 
machinery  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  employers.  Then 
came  the  reform  of  1832  which  substituted  one  set  of  politi¬ 
cal  masters  for  another,  and  dampened  the  enthusiasm  of 
the  working  class  for  political  reforms.  For  a  time  the 
stratagem  of  the  labor  leaders  was  conducted  on  an  exclu¬ 
sively  industrial  plan  and  the  social  war  acquired  a  still 
more  formidable  aspect.  Trade  unionism  became  the  battle- 
cry  of  the  friends  of  the  laborers,  and  the  employers  were 
thrown  into  a  state  of  extreme  apprehension.  New  hopes 
were  infused  into  the  hearts  of  the  lowly,  and  a  new  creed 
was  given  them  by  Robert  Owen  and  his  followers.  Palia- 
tive  remedies  in  the  form  of  social  legislation  began  to  be 


despised.  There  was  a  bigger  thing  for  the  working  class 
to  do — to  reconstruct  the  whole  society  on  a  new  basis. 

The  practical  Utopia  of  Owen  was  backed  by  the  theo¬ 
retical  doctrines  of  the  then  popular  socialist  writers. 
Charles  Hall’s  admirable  work  The  Effects  of  Civilization 
on  the  People  in  European  States  preached  a  social  crusade, 
while  William  Godwin’s  Political  Justice  pointed  to  the 
system  of  private  property  as  the  root  of  all  social  evil. 
The  writings  of  William  Thompson,  Thomas  Hodgskin, 
John  Gray,  and  the  minor  so-called  Ricardian  socialists, 
taught  the  propertyless  that  labor  was  the  only  universal 
measure  and  characteristic  distinction  of  wealth  and  that 
labor  should,  therefore,  enjoy  the  whole  produce  of  its  ex¬ 
ertions,  while,  on  the  other  hand,  every  individual  who  did 
not  apply  his  own  hands  to  the  factors  of  production, — all 
merchants,  manufacturers,  clerks,  shopmen,  directors, 
superintendents, — was  a  direct  tax  upon  the  manual 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


laborer.1  All  these  doctrines  strongly  tended  to  promote 
the  formation  of  Owenite  societies. 

A  characteristic  description  of  the  Owenite  intoxication 
of  that  period  is  given  by  Francis  Place: 


The  nonsensical  doctrine  preached  by  Robert  Owen  and 
others  respecting  communities  and  goods  in  common ;  abundance 
of  everything  man  ought  to  desire,  and  all  for  four  hours’ 
labor  out  of  every  twenty-four;  the  right  of  every  man  to  his 
share  of  the  earth  in  common,  and  his  right  to  whatever  his 
hands  had  been  employed  upon;  the  power  of  masters  under 
the  present  system  to  give  just  what  wages  they  pleased;  the 
right  of  the  laborer  to  such  wages  as  would  maintain  him  and 
his  comfort  for  eight  or  ten  hours’  labor ;  the  right  of  every 
man  who  was  unemployed  to  employment  and  to  such  an 
amount  of  wages  as  has  been  indicated  —  and  other  matters 
of  a  similar  kind  which  were  continually  inculcated  by  the 
workingmen’s  political  unions,  by  many  small  knots  of  persons, 
printed  in  small  pamphlets  and  handbills  which  were  sold 
twelve  for  a  penny  and  distributed  to  a  great  extent — had 
pushed  politics  aside,  .  .  .  among  the  working  people.  These 
pamphlets  were  written  almost  wholly  by  men  of  talent  and  of 
some  standing  in  the  world,  professional  men,  gentlemen, 
manufacturers,  tradesmen,  and  men  called  literary.  The  con¬ 
sequences  were  that  a  very  large  proportion  of  the  working 
people  in  England  and  Scotland  became  persuaded  that  they 
had  only  to  combine,  as  it  was  concluded  they  might  easily  do, 
to  compel  not  only  a  considerable  advance  of  wages  all  round, 
but  employment  for  every  one,  man  and  woman,  who  needed 
it,  at  short  hours.  This  notion  induced  them  to  form  them¬ 
selves  into  Trades  Unions  in  a  manner  and  to  an  extent  never 
before  known.2 

The  wage-earner,  however,  soon  experienced  a  bitter  dis- 


1  See  Professor  Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman,  “  On  Some  Neglected  British 
Economists,”  in  the  Economic  Journal ,  vol.  xiii,  1903. 

2  See  Sidney  and  Beatrice  Webb,  History  of  Trade  Unionism,  1902, 
pp.  141-142. 


79 


79]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM 

appointment  which  he  felt  the  more  because  of  his  high 
aspirations.  Taught  by  the  gospel  of  Utopia  to  despise 
specific,  regulative  and  immediate  remedies,  and  to  strive 
for  one  which  would  apply  to  all  social  evils  and  to  all  in¬ 
iquities,  he  acquired  an  aggressive  and  haughty  attitude 
towards  the  “  unproductive  ”  classes,  provoking  reciprocal 
hatred  and  stringent  opposition  from  the  latter.  The  capi¬ 
talists  were  naturally  not  loth  to  remove  the  “  Day  of  Judg¬ 
ment  ”  to  as  remote  a  future  as  they  possibly  could,  and 
they  saw  to  it  that  the  new  industrial  organization,  the 
“  New  Moral  World  ”,  should  not  “  come  suddenly  upon 
society  like  a  thief  in  the  night  ”.  In  fact,  their  watch  was 
so  alert  that  the  strongest  trades  unions  came  to  grief  as 
soon  as  they  attempted  to  realize  their  humblest  plans.  The 
aggressive  policy  of  the  laborers  encountered  a  still  more 
determined  opposition  not  only  on  the  part  of  the  employers 
but  also  of  the  government.  In  this  case  the  latter  enjoyed 
the  fruit  of  the  wisdom  of  Nassau  Senior,  who,  as  commis¬ 
sioner  appointed  to  inquire  into  the  state  of  combinations 
and  strikes,  recorded  his  conviction,  which  was  based  exclu¬ 
sively  on  statements  and  hearsay  gossip  of  employers,  that 
“  the  general  evils  and  general  dangers  of  combinations 
cannot  easily  be  exaggerated  ”,  that  “  if  a  few  agitators  can 
command  and  enforce  a  strike  which  first  paralyzes  the  in¬ 
dustry  of  the  peculiar  class  of  workpeople  over  whom  they 
tyrannize,  and  then  extends  itself  in  an  increasing  circle 
over  the  many  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  to  whose 
labor  the  assistance  of  that  peculiar  class  of  workpeople 
is  essential  .  .  .  that  if  this  state  of  things  is  to  continue, 
we  shall  not  retain  the  industry,  the  skill,  or  the  capital,  on 
which  our  manufacturing  superiority,  and,  with  that  super¬ 
iority,  our  power  and  almost  our  existence  as  a  nation,  de¬ 
pends  ”.1 

1  Nassau  W.  Senior,  Historical  and  Philosophical  Essays,  London, 
1865,  vol.  ii,  p.  171. 


8o  THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [go 

The  employers  stopped  short  of  nothing  until  they  had 
succeeded  in  defeating  and  crushing  the  labor  organizations. 
Even  the  most  popular  Grand  National  Consolidated  Trades 
Union  which  was  started,  through  the  agitation  of  Robert 
Owen,  in  1834,  and  which  enrolled  within  a  few  weeks  at 
least  half  a  million  members,  men  and  women  of  various 
trades,  was  exterminated  by  the  combination  of  employers 
who  resorted  to  lock-outs  in  order  to  force  the  laborers  to 
abandon  the  union.  The  conviction  of  many  strikers  and 
the  barbarous  sentences  brought  against  them  by  the  courts 
were  enough  to  chill  the  most  ardent  followers  of  the  new 
order.1  Notice  was  served  that  a  bill  would  be  introduced 
to  make  combinations  of  trades  impossible.  Many  a  trades 
unionist  began  to  suspect  that  the  new  moral  world  could 
not  be  ushered  in  without  a  hard  struggle  in  the  teeth  of  a 
hostile  government,  subservient  commissioners  and  corrupt 
courts.  Conspiracies,  intimidation  and  violence  on  the  part 
of  workingmen  began  to  show  signs  of  something  more 
dangerous  than  the  talk  of  some  future  Day  of  Judgment. 
The  capitalists,  however,  blinded  by  their  easy  victories, 
were  unable  to  read  the  handwriting  on  the  wall.  Union 
after  union  was  disbanded  and  crushed  by  the  newly-formed 
Chamber  of  Commerce,  thus  driving  multitudes  of  people 
into  the  very  pit  of  revolution.  “  Back  to  politics!”  became 
the  slogan  of  the  bulk  of  laborers.  Politics  again  became 
the  emblem  of  something  which  could  give  everything  and 
deprive  of  everything;  Parliament  began  to  be  regarded 
with  awe  as  a  new  Almighty  in  whose  word  lay  life  and 
death.  And  it  was  quite  natural.  The  workingmen  lost 
their  battle  on  the  industrial  field,  and  they  lost  it  because 
the  machinery  of  government  was  turned  against  them. 
The  important  point  of  stratagem  appeared  to  lie  in  the 

1  See  George  Loveless,  The  Victims  of  Whiggery,  London,  1837. 


Si]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM  8 1 

capture  of  that  machinery  and  its  use  against  the  capitalists. 
The  New  Poor  Law,  the  hostility  and  treachery  of  the  gov¬ 
ernment  and  the  crushing  defeat  of  labor  organizations 
brought,  to  use  Cobbett’s  words  on  an  earlier  occasion,  the 
issue  of  the  working  class  “  to  be  a  question  of  actual  star¬ 
vation  or  fighting  for  food;  and  when  it  comes  to  that 
point,  I  know  that  Englishmen  will  never  lie  down  and  die 
by  hundreds  by  the  wayside.”  1 

The  apotheosis  of  political  power  brought  again  the  issue 
of  universal  suffrage  to  the  foreground.  The  foremost 
radical  writers  renewed  their  fight  for  “  freedom  Bron- 
terre  started  his  National  Reformer  on  the  7th  of  January, 
1837,  with  the  declaration  that  the  “  money  monster  ”  must 
be  fought  with  his  own  weapons : 

Government,  Lazv,  Property,  Religion,  and  Morals,  these 
five  words  embrace  everything  that  affects  our  happiness  as 
social  beings,  and  consequently  all  that  a  reformer  can  have 
to  deal  with.  I  place  Government  at  the  head,  because  upon 
that  do  all  the  rest  really  depend.  It  is  the  Government  that 
makes  the  law.  The  lazv  determines  the  property — and  on 
state  of  property  depend  the  religion  and  morals,  and  ( 
consequence)  the  well-being  and  happiness  of  every  people 
in  the  world.  .  .  .  The  parent  cause  (of  the  wretched  condi¬ 
tion  of  the  people)  being  bad  government,  we  must  necessarily 
begin  with  that — and  if  the  government  be  bad,  because,  as  I 
contend,  it  is  wrongly  constituted,  our  first  attempt  must  be 
to  have  it  constituted  rightly.  Here,  then,  I  am  at  once  con¬ 
ducted  to  my  old  ground,  universal  suffrage.  A  government 
which  does  not  represent  the  interests  of  all  who  are  called 
upon  to  obey  its  laws,  is  necessarily  a  wrongly  constituted 
government. 

In  his  article  on  “  Social  Occupations  ”  in  the  same  issue 
1  See  the  Political  Register,  October  20,  1815. 


82 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[82 

he  dwells  at  some  length  on  the  same  question  and  upbraids 
the  masses  for  their  want  of  sufficient  interest  in  universal 
suffrage.  Says  he : 

I  know  but  one  way  of  salvation  for  us — but  one  way  of 
felling  the  monster  without  being  buried  underneath  his  ruins ; 
it  is  to  smite  him  with  the  authority  of  the  law ,  having  first  got 
the  law  on  the  people’s  side.  It  is  only  by  having  first  got  the 
law  on  his  side,  that  he  has  been  able  to  prostrate  us.  Why 
should  not  we  be  able  to  do  the  same  by  him  when  we  have 
got  the  law  on  ours?  .  .  .  What  right  has  he  to  exclude  you 
more  than  you  to  exclude  him?  ...  I  am,  therefore,  obliged, 
— reluctantly,  but  unavoidably  obliged — to  conclude  that  your 
exclusion  is  the  work  of  your  own  ignorant  and  craven  sub¬ 
mission.  You  have  made  no  bold  efforts  as  a  body — no  grand 
demonstrations  to  obtain  the  franchise;  you  have  occasionally 
petitioned,  it  is  true,  but  your  petitions  were  “  few  and  far 
between  ”,  they  were  also  weak  and  desultory,  seldom  bold 
and  commanding  —  never  simultaneous  and  absorbing.  You 
talked  in  them  about  your  paying  taxes,  and  being  liable  to 
serve  in  the  militia,  and  all  that  sort  of  unconsequential  rub¬ 
bish,  but  you  never  put  forward  your  claims  resolutely,  as  men 
who  had  an  equal,  and  even  a  superior  stake  in  the  question,  to 
that  of  your  oppressors — namely,  your  very  lives,  which  are 
hourly  threatened  with  destruction  by  the  murderous  money- 
monster.  Much  less  did  you  meet  simultaneously,  and  in 
millions,  to  demonstrate  the  absorbing  interest  you  took  in  the 
question.  On  the  contrary,  you  were  satisfied,  even  in  your 
best  days,  to  abandon  your  case  to  the  care  of  a  few  dema¬ 
gogues,  who,  however  honest  and  brave,  could  do  nothing 
for  you  without  some  grand  national  movement  on  your  own 
part. 

The  reproach  of  Bronterre  came  at  a  time  when  the  seeds 
of  discontent  had  already  begun  to  sprout  to  the  surface. 
The  “  grand  national  movement  ”  was  on  its  way.  It  was 
but  a  short  time  after  those  lines  had  been  penned  that  from 


83]  LABOR  LEGISLATION  AND  TRADE  UNIONISM 

the  ruins  of  trade  unionism  arose  a  magnificent  tower 
which,  for  over  a  decade,  allured  the  misery-stricken  lowly, 
and  illumined  the  way  for  millions  of  devoted  and  heroic 
men  and  women. 

The  name  of  that  tower  was  Chartism. 


CHAPTER  VI 


Knaves  will  tell  you  that  it  is  be¬ 
cause  you  have  no  property  you  are 
unrepresented.  I  tell  you,  on  the  con¬ 
trary,  it  is  because  you  are  unrepre¬ 
sented  that  you  have  no  property. 

— Bronterre. 

The  People’s  Charter 

The  London  Working  Men’s  Association  was  organized 
on  the  1 6th  of  June,  1836,  under  the  leadership  of  men  who 
for  a  number  of  years  had  been  associated  with  various 
phases  of  the  labor  movement.  Henry  Hetherington  and 
John  Cleave,  the  champions  of  a  free  unstamped  press,  Wil¬ 
liam  Lovett,  Henry  Vincent,  George  Julian  Harney  and 
other  prominent  members  of  trade  unions,  little  thought  then 
that  the  movement  which  they  inaugurated  was  destined  to 
play  such  a  revolutionary  role  in  the  life  of  the  English 
working  class.  Humble,  indeed,  were  the  objects  which 
the  association  set  for  itself  to  achieve.  Liberalism,  Radi¬ 
calism,  Trade  Unionism,  Socialism,  Owenism  and  Rotund- 
ism,  were  reduced  to  the  following  lowest  common  denomin¬ 
ators  : 1 

1.  To  draw  into  one  bond  of  unity  the  intelligent  and  in¬ 
fluential  portion  of  the  working  classes  in  town  and  country. 

2.  To  seek  by  every  legal  means  to  place  all  classes  of  society 
in  possession  of  their  equal  political  and  social  rights. 

3.  To  devise  every  possible  means,  and  to  use  every  exertion, 
to  remove  those  cruel  laws  that  prevent  the  free  circulation  of 
thought  through  the  medium  of  a  cheap  and  honest  press. 

1  See  Address  and  Rules  of  the  Working  Men's  Association ,  for 
Benefiting  Socially  and  Morally  the  Useful  Classes,  London,  1836. 

84  [84 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


85] 


4.  To  promote,  by  all  available  means,  the  education  of  the 
rising  generation,  and  the  extirpation  of  those  systems  which 
tend  to  future  slavery. 

5.  To  collect  every  kind  of  information  appertaining  to  the 
interests  of  the  working  classes  in  particular  and  society  in 
general,  especially  statistics  regarding  the  wages  of  labor, 
the  habits  and  condition  of  the  laborer,  and  all  those  that  mainly 
contribute  to  the  present  state  of  things. 

6.  To  meet  and  communicate  with  each  other  for  the  pur¬ 
pose  of  digesting  the  information  required,  and  to  mature 
such  plans  as  they  believe  will  conduce  in  practice  to  the  well¬ 
being  of  the  working  classes. 

7.  To  publish  their  views  and  sentiments  in  such  form  and 
manner  as  shall  best  serve  to  create  a  moral,  reflecting,  yet 
energetic  public  opinion ;  so  as  eventually  to  lead  to  a  gradual 
improvement  in  the  condition  of  the  working  classes,  without 
violence  or  commotion. 

8.  To  form  a  library  of  reference  and  useful  information ;  to 
maintain  a  place  where  they  can  associate  for  mental  improve¬ 
ment,  and  where  their  brethren  from  the  country  can  meet 
with  kindred  minds  actuated  by  one  great  motive — that  of  bene¬ 
fiting  politically,  socially,  and  morally,  the  useful  classes. 


In  this  address,  calling  upon  the  working  class  to  form 
similar  societies,  the  association  cautions  “  strictly  to  adhere 
to  a  judicious  selection  of  their  members,”  The  working- 
men  are  exhorted  to  make  “  the  principles  of  democracy  as 
respectable  in  practice  as  they  are  just  in  theory,  by  exclud¬ 
ing  the  drunken  and  immoral  from  our  ranks  and  uniting 
in  close  compact  with  the  honest,  sober,  moral  and  thinking 
portion  of  our  brethren.” 

The  rules  of  the  association  made  only  workingmen 
eligible  for  membership.  The  card  issued  by  the  associa¬ 
tion  to  its  members  contained  the  following  maxim :  “  The 
man  who-  evades  his  share  of  useful  labor  diminishes  the 
public  stock  of  wealth  and  throws  his  own  burden  upon 


86 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[86 


n 


is  neighbor.”  Persons  not  of  the  “  industrious .  classes  ” 
were  admitted  only  as  honorary  members  and  could  par¬ 
ticipate  in  the  debates  and  discussions  and  attend  all  meet¬ 
ings,  but  were  debarred  from  holding  any  office  or  from 
taking  any  part  in  the  management  of  the  organization. 

The  exclusiveness  of  the  association  was  the  direct  re¬ 
sult  of  former  experiences  with  radical  representatives  of 
the  middle  class.  Lovett  tells  only  half  of  the  story 
when  he  attributes  the  fixed  rule  of  exclusiveness  to  a  desire 
“  to  try  an  experiment,”  in  order  to  evince  the  discrimina¬ 
tion  and  independent  spirit  in  the  management  of  their  poli¬ 
tical  affairs,  in  which  the  workingmen  were  found  wanting. 
“  The  masses  and  their  political  organizations  were  taught 
to  look  up  to  great  men  (or  to  men  professing  greatness) 
rather  than  to  great  principles.  We  wished,  therefore,  to  es¬ 
tablish  a  political  school  of  self-instruction  among  them, 
in  which  they  should  accustom  themselves  to  examine  great 
social  and  political  principles.’’  1 

The  address  published  by  the  association,  however,  be¬ 
trays  the  real  cause : 


It  has  been  said  by  some  that  our  objects  are  exclusive,  seeing 
we  wish  to  confine  our  association  to  workingmen.  We  reply, 
that  judging  from  experience  and  appearance,  the  political 
and  social  regeneration  of  the  working  classes  must  be  begun 
by  themselves,  and,  therefore,  they  should  not  admit  any  pre¬ 
ponderating  influence  of  wealth  or  title  to  swerve  them  from 
their  duty.  .  .  .  Let  not,  however,  the  men  of  wealth  imagine 
that  we  have  any  ulterior  designs  inimical  to  their  rights,  or 
views  opposed  to  the  peace  and  harmony  of  society.  On  the 
contrary,  we  seek  to  render  property  more  secure;  life  more 
sacred ;  and  to  preserve  inviolate  every  institution  that  can  be 
made  to  contribute  to  the  happiness  of  man.  We  only  seek 


1  William  Lovett,  Life  and  Struggles,  pp.  91-92. 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


that  share  in  the  institutions  and  government  of  our  country 
which  our  industry  and  usefulness  justly  merit. 


The  address  was  signed  by  Henry  Hetherington,  treas¬ 
urer,  and  William  Lovett,  secretary,  but  was  apparently  com¬ 
posed  by  men  of  various  creeds.  It  expressed  no  clear-cut 
principle  ;  it  held  forth  no  fixed  ideal.  While  it  consoled  the 
men  of  wealth  with  the  assertion  that  the  association  had 
no  ulterior  or  sinister  designs,  that  it  did  not  intend  “  to  get 
a  transfer  of  wealth,  power  or  influence  for  a  party,”  it  also 
vowed  to  probe  social  evils  to  their  source  and  “  to  apply 
effective  remedies  to  prevent  instead  of  unjust  laws  to  pun¬ 
ish.”  The  source  of  social  evils,  not  clearly  visible  in  this 
declaration,  was  revealed,  however,  in  a  subsequent  address 
of  the  association  to  the  working  classes  of  Belgium,  issued 
in  November,  1836.  Starting  with  the  interesting  assertion 
that  “the  cause  of  those  foolish  dissentions  between  nations 
lies  in  the  ignorance  ”  of  the  workingmen  of  their  position 
in  society,  the  address  continues : 


Ignorance  has  caused  us  to  believe  that  we  were  “  born  to 
toil,”  and  others  to  enjoy — that  we  were  naturally  inferior,  and 
should  silently  bow  to  the  government  of  those  who  were 
pleased  to  call  themselves  superior ;  and  consequently  those 
who  have  governed  us  have  done  so  for  their  own  advantage, 
and  not  ours.  .  .  .  Their  laws  have  been  enacted  to  perpetu¬ 
ate  their  power,  and  administered  to  generate  fear  and  sub¬ 
mission  towards  self-constituted  greatness,  hereditary  ignor¬ 
ance,  or  wealth,  however  unjustly  acquired.  .  .  .  Our  eman¬ 
cipation,  however,  will  depend  on  the  extent  of  this  knowl¬ 
edge  among  the  working  classes  of  all  countries,  or  its  salutary 
effects  in  causing  us  to  perceive  our  real  position  in  society — 
in  causing  us  to  feel  that  we,  being  the  producers  of  wealth, 
have  the  first  claim  to  its  enjoyment.1 


1  William  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  98. 


88 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[88 

The  association  recognized  the  importance  of  political 
power  from  the  beginning  and  set  forth  its  views  in  a  three¬ 
penny  pamphlet — The  Rotten  House  of  Commons.1  The 
pamphlet  contained  statistical  information  on  the  composi¬ 
tion  of  Parliament.  The  tables  were  compiled  from  Parlia¬ 
mentary  returns  and  from  the  elaborate  works  of  reputable 
statisticians.  They  showed  that  tts  of  the  entire  popu¬ 
lation,  or  ¥7}-  of  the  adult  males  above  the  age  of  twenty- 
one,  had  the  power  of  passing  all  the  laws  in  the  House  of 
Commons,  which  would  be  binding  upon  all  inhabitants  of 
England.  The  proportion  of  registered  electors  who  had 
the  vote  to  the  number  of  males  above  twenty-one  years  of 
age  in  the  United  Kingdom  was  about  I  to  The  com¬ 

position  of  the  reformed  House  of  Commons  was  shown  to 
consist  exclusively  of  members  of  the  nobility,  of  the  army 
and  navy,  the  barristers  and  solicitors  and  of  the  moneyed 
classes. 

The  people  of  England  were  invited  to  reflect  on  the 
question  whether  the  working  classes  had  fit  representatives 
in  the  great  number  of  land-holders,  money-makers,  specu¬ 
lators,  usurers,  lords,  earls,  and  other  honorables,  as  well  as 
in  the  number  of  military  and  navy  representatives,  barris¬ 
ters,  solicitors,  etc. 


Are  the  manufacturer  and  capitalist,  whose  exclusive  monopoly 
of  the  combined  powers  of  wood,  iron,  and  steam,  enables  them 
to  cause  the  destitution  of  thousands,  and  who  have  an  interest 
in  forcing  labor  down  to  the  minimum  reward,  fit  to  represent 
the  interests  of  working  men?  Is  the  master ,  whose  interest 
it  is  to  purchase  labor  at  the  cheapest  rate,  a  fit  representative 
for  the  workman,  whose  interest  it  is  to  get  the  most  he  can 
for  his  labor? 

1  The  Rotten  House  of  Commons,  being  an  Exposition  of  the  Present 
State  of  the  Franchise,  and  an  Appeal  to  the  Nation  of  the  Course  to 
be  Pursued  in  the  Approaching  Crisis,  Hetherington,  Strand. 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


The  association  urged  the  laborers  to  refuse  to  be  the 
tools  of  any  party  who  will  not,  as  a  first  and  essential 
measure ,  give  to  the  working  classes  equal  political  and 
social  rights ,  so  that  they  may  send  their  own  representa¬ 
tives,  from  the  ranks  of  those  who1  live  by  labor, 


to  deliberate  and  determine  along  with  all  other  interests ,  that 
the  interests  of  the  laboring  classes — of  those  who  are  the 
foundation  of  the  social  edifice — shall  not  be  daily  sacrificed 
to  glut  the  extravagance  of  the  pampered  few.  If  you  feel 
with  us,  then  you  will  proclaim  it  in  the  workshop,  preach  it  in 
your  societies,  publish  it  from  town  to  village,  from  county  to 
county,  and  from  nation  to  nation,  that  there  is  no  hope  for 
the  sons  of  toil,  till  those  who  feel  with  them,  who  sympathise 
with  them,  and  whose  interests  are  identified  with  theirs,  have 
an  equal  right  to  determine  what  laws  shall  be  enacted  or  plans 
adopted  for  justly  governing  this  country. 


The  association  had  Hetherington’s  weekly  “  Twopenny 
Despatch  ”  at  its  disposal.  It  was  not  satisfied,  however, 
with  printed  propaganda  alone.  Immediately  upon  its  for¬ 
mation,  Hetherington,  Vincent  and  Cleave  were  engaged  to 
make  an  agitation  tour  all  over  the  country.  They  depicted 
the  wrongs  of  the  toiling  classes  and  fanned  the  passions  of 
the  people  into  a  flame.  Within  a  very  short  time  they  were 
successful  in  organizing  a  great  number  of  workingmen's  ] 
associations.  Encouraged  by  the  general  response  of  the 
masses,  the  association  published  a  petition  for  a  new  Par¬ 
liamentary  Constitution.  The  petition  contained  the  essence 
of  the  pamphlet — The  Rotten  House  of  Commons ,  and  was 
commented  upon  by  the  radical  writers  as  one  of  the  most 
important  documents.  Bronterre  reprinted  it  in  his  Na¬ 
tional  Reformer  of  February  n,  1837,  with  the  following 
editorial  remarks  “  to  the  unrepresented  millions  ’’ : 


I  have  seen  few  documents  that  comprise  so  many  important 


90 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[90 

facts  within  an  equal  space ;  I  have  not  seen  any  which  reflects 
the  mind  of  indignant  industry  with  brighter  effect ;  or  which, 
as  a  clear  and  powerful  exposition  of  the  wrongs  inflicted  on 
you,  and  of  the  rights  withheld,  is  better  calculated  to  chal¬ 
lenge  regard  and  sympathy  in  your  behalf. 

The  petition  was  drawn  up  by  William  Lovett  and  con¬ 
tained  the  nucleus  of  the  subsequently  famous  People’s 
Charter.1  The  House  of  Commons  was  requested  to  enact 
a  law  with  the  following  “  six  points  ” : 

(1)  Equal  Representation. 

(2)  Universal  Suffrage. 

(3)  Annual  Parliaments. 

(4)  No  Property  Qualifications. 

(5)  Vote  by  Ballot. 

(6)  Payments  to  Members. 

On  the  28  of  February,  1837,  a  great  public  meeting  was 
held  in  London,  at  the  Crown  and  Anchor,  under  the  aus¬ 
pices  of  the  London  Working  Men's  Association,  at  which, 
after  the  petition  was  approved  and  signed  by  about  three 
thousand  persons,  a  unanimous  resolution  was  carried  to 
present  it  to  Parliament.  Having  no  representatives  of 
their  own,  the  association  entrusted  the  petition  to  J.  A. 
Roebuck,  who  was  at  that  time  considered  the  most  staunch 
advocate  of  democratic  principles  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
On  his  advice,  the  association  issued  a  circular  to  all  radical 
members  of  Parliament  to  meet  at  the  British  Coffee-house, 
in  Cockspur  Street,  on  the  3rd  of  May,  1837,  and  at  this 
meeting,  which  was  attended  by  several  members  of  the 
House,  including  Daniel  O’Connell,  Joseph  Hume,  Colonel 
T.  P.  Thompson,  W.  S.  Crawford,  J.  T.  Leader  and  others, 
Lovett  introduced  the  subject  on  the  part  of  the  association. 


1  See  Appendix  A. 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


91 


91] 

The  discussions  which  lasted  for  two  evenings  resulted  in 
the  unanimous  adoption  of  four  important  resolutions.  In 
the  first,  the  members  of  Parliament  agreed  to  support 
Representative  Roebuck  -in  his  proposition  for  universal 
suffrage.  In  the  second,  they  pledged  themselves  to  sup¬ 
port  and  vote  for  any  bill  embodying  “  the  principles  of 
universal  suffrage,  equal  representation,  free  selection  of 
representatives  without  reference  to  property,  the  ballot,  and 
short  parliaments  of  fixed  duration,  the  limit  not  to  exceed 
three  years.”  The  third  resolution  bound  them  to  support 
and  vote  for  a  bill  for  such  reform  of  the  House  of  Lords 
as  shall  render  it  responsible  to  the  people.  The  fourth 
resolution  provided  that  a  committee  of  twelve  be  appointed 
to  draw  up  a  bill  in  a  legal  form  embodying  the  above  prin¬ 
ciples  and  to  submit  it  to  another  joint  meeting.  These 
resolutions  were  signed  by  Daniel  O’Connell,  Charles  Hind- 
ley,  W.  S.  Crawford,  J.  T.  Leader,  John  Fielden,  T. 
Wakley,  D.  W.  Harvey,  T.  P.  Thompson,  J.  A.  Roebuck, 
and  Dr.  Bowring.  The  committee  appointed  to  draw  up 
the  bill  consisted  of  O’Connell,  Roebuck,  Leader,  Hindley, 
Colonel  Thompson,  Crawford,  Lovett,  Lletherington,  Vin¬ 
cent,  Cleave,  J.  Watson,  and  R.  Moore, — the  last  six  being 
members  of  the  association. 

The  death  of  William  IV  led  to  the  prorogation  of  Par¬ 
liament.  On  this  occasion,  the  association  issued  an  ad¬ 
dress  to  reformers  on  the  forthcoming  elections,  urging  that 
only  those  candidates  should  be  returned,  who  would  pledge 
themselves  to  universal  suffrage  and  “  all  the  other  essen¬ 
tials  of  self-government.”  It  was  in  this  address  that  the 
association  for  the  first  time  referred  to  the  “  six  points  ” 
as  the  People's  Charter. 

The  address  was  circulated  among  all  workingmen’s  as¬ 
sociations  and  political  unions.  It  was  at  this  juncture  that 
the  famous  Birmingham  Political  Union  which  had  kept 


92 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


aloof  from  the  new  political  agitation  declared  itself  in  favor 
of  the  petition.  The  Birmingham  laborers  were  considered 
the  aristocracy  of  the  working  class;  the  political  union  en¬ 
joyed  the  reputation  of  having  been  greatly  responsible  for 
the  successful  issue  of  the  campaign  for  the  Reform  Bill 
of  1832.  The  entrance  of  the  Birmingham  union  into  a 
new  campaign  for  universal  suffrage  was,  therefore,  hailed 
by  the  workingmen’s  associations  as  a  singular  victory  for 
their  cause.  Their  satisfaction  was  particularly  enhanced 
after  the  publication  by  the  union  of  an  address,  in  which 
it  confessed  its  disappointment  with  the  Whigs  and  attri¬ 
buted  the  distress  of  the  people  to  the  discredited  Reform 
Bill: 


The  motive  and  end  of  all  legislation  is  the  happiness  of  the 
universal  people.  Let  us  try  the  Reform  Bill  by  that  test. 
.  .  .  What  do  we  find?  Merchants  bankrupt,  workmen  un¬ 
employed  and  starving,  workhouses  crowded,  factories  de¬ 
serted,  distress  and  dissatisfaction  everywhere  prevalent.  .  .  . 
Were  the  people  fully  and  fairly  represented  in  Parliament, 
would  such  things  be? 


After  the  accession  of  Oueen  Victoria,  the  London 
Working  Men’s  Association  in  conjunction  with  other  or¬ 
ganizations  prepared  an  address  to  Her  Majesty.  An  ex¬ 
change  of  correspondence  took  place  between  Lovett  and 
Lord  John  Russell,  then  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home 
Department.  Lovett  requested  that  a  deputation  of  six  per¬ 
sons  be  presented  personally  to  the  Queen.  Russell  replied 
that  the  deputation  would  have  to  wait  until  Her  Majesty 
held  a  levee,  and  that  they  must  attend  in  court  dress. 
Lovett’s  retort  was  that  they  had  “  neither  the  means  nor 
the  inclination  to  indulge  in  such  absurdities  as  dress  coats 
and  wigs  ”,  and  he  expressed  the  hope  that  the  day  was  not 
distant,  when  some  better  means  would  be  devised  “  for 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


93 


93] 

letting  the  sovereign  hear  of  the  addresses  and  petitions  of 
the  people.”  The  address  to  the  Queen,  as  well  as  the  cor¬ 
respondence  between  Lovett  and  Russell,  caused  much  com¬ 
ment  in  the  press.  In  the  address  the  Queen  was  asked  to 
cause  a  bill  to  be  introduced  for  the  extension  of  the  right 
of  suffrage  to  all  the  adult  population  of  the  kingdom.  The 
address  was  couched  in  courteous  but  resolute  terms,  point¬ 
ing  to'  the  “  many  monstrous  anomalies  springing  out  of  the 
constitution  of  society,  the  corruptions  of  government  and 
the  defective  education  of  mankind  ”  as  the  cause  of  the 
abnormal  condition  that  the  bulk  of  the  nation  were  toiling 
slaves  from  birth  till  death,  that  the  middle  classes  were 
racked  with  the  curse  of  business  distrust,  few  being  spared 
from  bankruptcy,  and  that  but  a  trifling  portion  of  the  suc¬ 
cessful  few  could  be  found  “  free  from  the  disease  of  sloth 
and  cares  of  idleness  and  debauchery.”  The  exclusive  few 
— it  was  set  out — used  all  their  means  to  retain  within  their 
own  circle  all  the  legislative  and  executive  powers  in  order 
to  protect  themselves  against  the  wrath  of  the  suffering 
multitudes  and  to  perpetuate  “  their  own  despotic  sway.” 

The  economic  suffering  of  the  masses  is  directly  attri¬ 
buted  to  the  want  of  suffrage : 

To  this  baneful  source  of  exclusive  political  power  may  be 
traced  the  persecution  of  fanaticism,  the  feuds  of  superstition, 
and  most  of  the  wars  and  carnage  which  disgrace  our  history. 
To  this  pernicious  origin  may  justly  be  attributed  the  unre¬ 
mitted  toil  and  wretchedness  of  your  Majesty’s  industrious 
people,  together  with  most  of  the  vices  and  crimes  springing 
from  poverty  and  ignorance,  which  in  a  country  blessed  by 
nature,  enriched  by  art,  and  boasting  of  her  progress  and 
knowledge,  mock  her  humanity  and  degrade  her  character. 
.  .  .  These  exclusive  interests,  under  the  names  of  Whig  and 
Tory,  have  for  many  years  past  succeeded  in  making  Royalty 
a  mere  puppet  of  their  will.  In  that  name  they  have  plun- 


94 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[94 

dered  at  home  and  desolated  abroad.  .  .  .  But  the  superstitious 
days  of  arbitrary  dominion  and  holy  errors  are  fast  falling 
away;  the  chief  magistrate  of  an  enlightened  people  must  learn 
to  know  and  respect  its  delegated  authority — and  must  look 
for  power  and  fame  to  the  welfare  of  the  people.  .  .  .  We  trust 
that  your  Majesty  will  not  permit  either  of  the  factions  who 
live  on  abuses,  and  profit  at  the  expense  of  the  millions,  to 
persuade  you  to  any  course  of  policy  other  than  that  of  right 
and  justice.  ...  It  is  not  just,  that  out  of  a  population  of 
tzventy-hve  millions  of  people,  only  eight  hundred  thousand 
should  have  the  power  of  electing  what  is  called  the  Commons’ 
House  of  Parliament. 

The  naive  faith  of  the  association  in  political  reform  as 
a  panacea  for  all  evil  can  be  seen  from  the  address,  which 
was  sent  in  1837  to  the  American  “  brethren  ”,  extolling  the 
political  liberty  and  institutions  enjoyed  by  the  workingmen 
in  the  United  States,  and  at  the  same  time  conveying  deep 
surprise  at  the  fact  that  they  had  not  progressed  any  further 
after  sixty  years  of  freedom : 1 

Why  are  you,  to  so  great  an  extent,  ruled  by  men  who 
speculate  on  your  credulity  and  thrive  by  your  prejudices? 
Why  have  lawyers  a  preponderating  influence  in  your  coun¬ 
try?  .  .  .  Why  has  so  much  of  your  fertile  country  been  par¬ 
celled  out  between  swindling  bankers  and  grinding  capitalists 
who  seek  to  establish  (as  in  our  own  country)  a  monopoly  in 
that  land  which  nature  bestowed  in  common  to  all  her  children  ? 
Why  have  so  many  of  your  cities,  towns,  railroads,  canals,  and 
manufactories,  become  the  monopolized  property  of  those 
“  who  toil  not,  neither  do  they  spin  ”  ? — while  you,  who  raised 
them  by  your  labors,  are  still  in  the  position  of  begging  leave 
to  erect  others,  and  to  establish  for  them  similar  monopolies? 

In  the  general  election  of  1837,  the  most  outspoken  Liber- 

1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  130,  131. 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


95 


als,  S.  Crawford,  Colonel  Thompson  and  Roebuck,  were 
defeated  by  the  united  opposition  of  the  Whigs  and-  Tories. 
Far  from  being  discouraged,  the  London  Working  Men’s 
Association  called  a  meeting  of  the  Committee  of  Twelve 
which  had  been  appointed  to  prepare  the  bill.  The  com¬ 
mittee  then  authorized  Roebuck  and  Lovett  to  draft  the 
document.  With  the  exception  of  the  preamble  which  was 
written  by  Roebuck,  the  bill  was  prepared  by  Lovett,  after 
having  consulted  Francis  Place  as  to  its  form  and  legal 
technicalities.  The  original  draft  contained  a  provision  for 
the  suffrage  of  women.  This  was  discarded  as  it  was  feared 
that  such  demand  might  retard  the  suffrage  of  men.  After 
some  other  changes  were  made,  Lovett’s  Bill  was  finally 
approved  by  the  Committee  of  Twelve  and  then  by  the 
London  Working  Men’s  Association.  This  hill  was  desig¬ 
nated  the  “  People's  Charter  Daniel  O’Connell,  who  be¬ 
fore  long  deserted  the  ranks  of  the  Chartists,  virulent  in  his 
opposition  till  the  day  of  his  death,  is  credited  with  exclaim¬ 
ing,  while  handing  the  bill  to  Lovett,  “  There,  Lovett,  is 
your  Charter;  agitate  for  it,  and  never  be  content  with 
anything  else.” 

The  People’s  Charter  was  published  on  the  8th  of  May, 
1838,  and  was  sent  broadcast  together  with  an  address, 
which  was  signed  by  Henry  Hetherington,  Treasurer,  and 
William  Lovett,  Secretary,  and  which  contained  a  popular 
exposition  of  the  principles  of  the  Charter  and  the  plan  for 
obtaining  it: 


\ 


Having  frequently  stated  the  reasons  for  zealously  espous¬ 
ing  the  great  principles  of  reform,  we  have  now  endeavored 
to  set  them  forth.  We  need  not  reiterate  the  facts  and  un¬ 
refuted  arguments  which  have  so  often  been  stated  and  urged 
in  their  support.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  we  hold  it  to  he  an 


1  See  Appendix  B. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


axiom  in  politics,  that  self-government,  by  representation,  is 
the  only  just  foundation  of  political  power — the  only  true 
basis  of  constitutional  rights — the  only  legitimate  parent  of 
good  laws ; — and  we  hold  it  as  an  indubitable  truth  that  all 
government  which  is  based  on  any  other  foundation,  has  a 
perpetual  tendency  to  degenerate  into  anarchy  or  despotism; 
or  to  beget  class  and  wealth  idolatry  on  the  one  hand,  or 
poverty  and  misery  on  the  other. 

While,  however,  we  contend  for  the  principle  of  self-gov¬ 
ernment,  we  admit  that  laws  will  only  be  just  in  proportion  as 
the  people  are  enlightened ;  on  this,  socially  and  politically,  the 
happiness  of  all  must  depend ;  but,  as  self-interest,  unaccom¬ 
panied  by  virtue,  ever  seeks  its  own  exclusive  benefit,  so  will 
the  exclusive  and  privileged  classes  of  society  ever  seek  to 
perpetuate  their  power  and  to  proscribe  the  enlightenment  of 
the  people.  Hence  we  are  induced  to  believe  that  the  enlight¬ 
enment  of  all  will  sooner  emanate  from  the  exercise  of  politi¬ 
cal  power  by  all  the  people,  than  by  their  continuing  to  trust 
to  the  selfish  government  of  the  few. 

A  strong  conviction  of  these  truths,  coupled  as  that  con¬ 
viction  is  with  the  belief  that  most  of  our  political  and  social 
evils  can  be  traced  to  corrupt  and  exclusive  legislation,  and 
that  the  remedy  will  be  found  in  extending  to  the  people  at 
large  the  exercise  of  those  rights  now  monopolized  by  a  few, 
has  induced  us  to  make  some  exertions  towards  embodying 
our  principles  in  the  Charter. 

We  are  the  more  inclined  to  take  some  practicable  step  in 
favor  of  reform,  from  the  frequent  disappointments  the 
cause  has  experienced.  We  have  heard  eloquent  effusions 
in  favor  of  political  equality  from  the  hustings,  and  the  senate- 
house,  suddenly  change  into  prudent  reasonings  on  property  and 
privileges,  at  the  winning  smile  of  the  minister.  We  have  seen 
depicted  in  glowing  language  bright  patriotic  promises  of  the 
future,  which  have  left  impressions  on  us  more  lasting  than 
the  perfidy  or  apostacy  of  the  writers.  .  .  . 

The  object  we  contemplate  in  the  drawing  up  of  this  bill  is 
to  cause  the  Radicals  of  the  kingdom  to  form,  if  possible,  a 


THE  PEOPLE’S  CHARTER 


97 


concentration  of  their  principles  in  a  practical  form,  upon 
which  they  could  be  brought  to  unite,  and  to  which  they  might 
point,  as  a  Charter  they  are  determined  to  obtain. 

We  intend  that  copies  of  it  shall  be  forwarded  to  all  the 
Working  Men’s  Associations  and  to  all  Reform  Associations 
in  the  kingdom  to  which  we  can  have  access,  and  we  hereby 
call  upon  them,  in  the  spirit  of  brotherhood,  to  examine,  sug¬ 
gest,  and  improve  upon  it,  until  it  is  so  perfected  as  to  meet,  as 
far  as  possible,  with  general  approbation.  When  it  is  so  far 
improved,  and  has  received  their  sanction,  we  intend  that  it 
shall  be  presented  to  Parliament,  and  we  trust  that  petitions 
will  not  be  wanting  to  show  how  far  we  are  united  in  demand¬ 
ing  its  enactment.  We  hope,  also,  that  electors  and  non¬ 
electors  will  continue  to  make  it  the  pledge  of  their  candidates ; 
will  seek  to  extend  its  circulation ;  talk  over  its  principles ;  and 
resolve  that,  as  public  opinion  forced  the  Whig  Reform  Bill, 
so  in  like  manner  shall  this  bill  eventually  become  the  law  of 
England . 


The  publication  of  the  People's  Charter  gave  a  fresh  im¬ 
petus  to  the  enthusiasm  of  the  universal  suffragists.  The 
best  talents  of  the  Working  Men’s  Associations  and  other 
radical  societies  joined  in  a  gigantic  effort  to'  obtain  the  im¬ 
mediate  enactment  of  the  Charter.  The  vague  and  ambigu¬ 
ous  phraseology  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association 
gave  place  to  a  determined  expression  of  class  consciousness- 
The  general  press  cautioned  against  the  Chartist  missionaries 
who  were  branded  as  scoundrels,  firebrands,  plunderers, 
knaves,  and  assassins.  The  people,  however,  paid  little 
heed  to  these  warnings  and  eagerly  demonstrated  their 
“  general  approbation  ”  of  the  Charter  in  a  series  of  grand 
meetings  and  parades. 


CHAPTER  VII 


i 

The  Leaders 


The  years  1838  and  1839  were  the  most  auspicious  for 
the  Chartist  Movement.  Instigated  by  the  acute  eco¬ 
nomic  distress,  the  people  were  in  the  mood  to  follow  almost 
anybody  who  could  stimulate  their  indignation  to  activity. 
The  leaders  seemed  to  have  realized  this  and  vied  with  each 
other  in  their  endeavors  to  gain  the  confidence  of  the  work¬ 
ing  class.  The  response  of  the  people,  however,  was  too 
spontaneous,  almost  volcanic,  to  allow  the  establishment  of 
any  efficient  and  responsible  organization.  As  in  every  mass 
movement,  many  a  leader  was  swept  off  his  feet  in  the  whirl¬ 
wind  of  universal  protest  against  the  existing  regime.  In¬ 
stead  of  leading,  they  were  made  to  follow,  and,  at  best,  to 
agitate.  This  for  a  time  saved  the  ranks  of  the  Chartists 
from  complete  disruption,  although  it  was  an  open  secret 
that  there  were  “  two  parties  in  the  Chartist  ranks,”  and, 
what  is  more,  that  they  had  “  different  objects  in  view,’? 
that  these  two  parties  were  “  decidedly  hostile  to  each 
other,’'  and  that  no  union  could  ever  take  place  between 
the  “  honest  or  determined  Chartists  and  the  weak,  vacillat¬ 
ing  and  scheming  Chartists.”  1 

The  most  essential  difference,  which  was  of  prime  import¬ 
ance  for  the  evolutionary  period  of  the  movement,  lay  in  the 
mode  of  agitation.  The  People’s  Charter  emanated,  as  we 
have  seen,  from  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association, 


98 


1  The  London  Democrat,  April  20,  1839. 


[98 


THE  LEADERS 


99 


99] 

whose  leaders  designed  a  policy  of  moral  force,  of  education. 
In  its  first  address,  the  association  marked  its  future  task  in 
the  following  terms: 

Who  can  foretell  the  great  political  and  social  advantages 
that  must  accrue  from  the  wide  extension  of  societies  of  this 
description  acting  up  to  their  principles?  Imagine  the  honest, 
sober  and  reflecting  portion  of  every  town  and  village  in  the 
kingdom  linked  together  as  a  band  of  brothers,  honestly  re¬ 
solved  to  investigate  all  subjects  connected  with  their  interests, 
and  to  prepare  their  minds  to  combat  with  the  errors  and 
enemies  of  society — setting  an  example  of  propriety  to  their 
neighbors,  and  enjoying  even  in  poverty  a  happy  home.  And 
in  proportion  as  home  is  made  pleasant,  by  a  cheerful  and 
intelligent  partner,  by  dutiful  children,  and  by  means  of  com¬ 
fort,  which  their  knowledge  has  enabled  them  to  snatch  from 
the  ale-house,  so  are  the  bitters  of  life  sweetened  with  hap¬ 
piness. 

Think  you  a  corrupt  Government  could  perpetuate  its  ex¬ 
clusive  and  demoralizing  influence  amid  a  people  thus  united 
and  instructed?  Could  a  vicious  aristocracy  find  its  servile 
slaves  to  render  homage  to  idleness  and  idolatry  to  the  wealth 
too  often  fraudulently  exacted  from  industry?  Could  the 
present  gambling  influence  of  money  perpetuate  the  slavery  of 
the  millions,  for  the  gains  or  dissipation  of  the  few?  Could 
corruption  sit  in  the  judgment  seat — empty-headed  import¬ 
ance  in  the  senate — money-getting  hypocrisy  in  the  pulpit — 
and  debauchery,  fanaticism,  poverty,  and  crime  stalk  tri¬ 
umphantly  through  the  land — if  the  millions  were  educated  in 
a  knowledge  of  their  rights?  No,  no,  friends;  and  hence  the 
efforts  of  the  exclusive  few  to  keep  the  people  ignorant  and 
divided.  Be  ours  the  task,  then,  to  unite  and  instruct  them ; 
for  be  assured  the  good  that  is  to  be  must  be  begun  by  our¬ 
selves. 

At  the  beginning  the  agitation  was  preeminently  peaceful. 
The  London  Working  Men’s  Association  introduced  a  sys- 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


IOO 


[lOO 


tem  of  national  and  international  addresses  as  a  means  for 
enlightening  the  people  on  all  social  and  political  events  of 
importance.  The  addresses  were  well  received  by  the  better 
elements  of  the  working  class,  but  failed  to  exert  so  great 
an  effect  on  the  masses  who  felt  impatient  with  the  “  moral, 
vacillating,  scheming  humbugs,”  and  preferred  “  to  take 
their  affairs  in  their  own  hands.”  It  was  no  surprise,  there¬ 
fore,  that  the  advocates  of  physical  force  and  insurrection, 
welcomed  by  the  people  from  the  very  outset,  soon  gained 
the  upper  hand  in  the  movement-  Indeed,  rampant  dis¬ 
satisfaction  was  displayed  on  more  than  one  occasion,  and 
some  of  the  leaders  went  even  so  far  as  to  withdraw  their 
active  support.  The  fatal  blight  of  discord  was,  however, 
overcome  during  the  first  period.  The  masses  were  im¬ 
bued  with  the  hope  that  the  People’s  Charter  would  bring 
about  complete  salvation.  The  Charter  contained,  indeed, 
only  political  reforms,  but  the  people  knew  from  the  lead¬ 
ers  that  such  reforms  were  the  only  instrument  for  the  ex¬ 
termination  of  all  evils.  The  Chartist  speakers,  as  well  as 
the  Chartist  writers,  all  agreed  that  the  curse  of  the  country 
lay  in  “  class  legislation  ” : 

It  has  corrupted  the  whole  government — poisoned  the  press, 
demoralized  society,  prostituted  the  Church,  dissipated  the  re¬ 
sources  of  the  nation,  created  monopolies,  paralyzed  trade, 
ruined  half  its  merchants,  produced  almost  national  bank¬ 
ruptcy,  depressed  the  whole  working  classes,  and  pauperized 
most  of  them.  Consequently,  the  sooner  we  get  rid  of  such  a 
monstrous  system,  it  will  be  so  much  the  better  for  all,  ex¬ 
cept  for  those  who  either  live,  or  expect  to  live,  by  plunder.1 


The  masses  believed,  they  were  eager  to  believe  in  every¬ 
thing  which  held  out  the  promise  of  relief.  They  took  up 


1  The  Chartist  Circular,  April  18,  1840. 


IOl] 


THE  LEADERS 


IOI 


the  rallying  cry,  “  The  Charter,  the  whole  Charter,  and 
nothing  but  the  Charter,”  with  a  zeal  characteristic  of  the 
common  people.  This  reacted  on  the  leaders  and  forced 
their  personal  and  theoretical  differences  to  the  background. 
The  differences  were  by  no  means  given  up.  The  leaders 
merely  buried  their  hatchets  for  a  while,  with  the  under¬ 
standing  that  they  would  be  picked  up  again  at  the  oppor¬ 
tune  time  after  the  Charter  should  have  become  an  accom¬ 
plished  fact.  Until  then  they  were  willing  to  let  their  eco¬ 
nomic  and  social  creeds  take  care  of  themselves.  This  was 
made  clear  by  Bronterre  even  as  early  as  1837.  In  discuss¬ 
ing  his  pet  theory  of  nationalization  of  land,  he  cut  himself 
short : 

Better,  far  better  it  were  to  sink  such  questions  for  the 
present.  When  all  shall  have  votes,  it  will  be  in  the  power  of 
each  to  make  known  his  sentiments  respecting  the  land,  as  well 
as  respecting  everything  else,  and  should  a  majority  think  with 
him,  his  sentiments  will  become  law  without  cavil  or  con¬ 
straint.  Till  then,  our  theories,  however  just,  are  useless.1 

The  good  intentions  of  the  leaders  were  not  realized. 
There  were  too  many  points  of  friction  in  their  mental  con¬ 
stitution  as  well  as  in  their  temperamental  make-up.  At 
the  time  of  popular  excitement,  all  were  carried  away  by 
the  torrent  of  general  indignation,  few  stopping  to  soothe 
their  personal  feelings.  It  was  only  after  the  movement 
had  met  the  strenuous  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  govern¬ 
ment  and  had  become  paralyzed,  that  demoralization  set  in, 
disrupting  the  Chartist  army  into  a  number  of  hostile  squads. 

The  small  coterie  of  leaders,  who  during  the  first  period 
stamped  their  personalities  on  the  movement  and  directed 
the  destinies  of  millions  of  people,  included  men  of  excep- 

1  The  National  Reformer,  Feb.  25,  1837. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


102 


[  102 


tional  character  and  mentality,  who  gave  themselves  like 
martyrs  to  the  cause. 


William  Lovett,  the  author  of  the  People’s  Charter  and 
“  the  gentlest  of  agitators,”  was,  according  to  the  descrip¬ 
tion  of  Francis  Place,  a  tall,  thin  and  rather  melancholy 
man,  “  soured  with  the  perplexities  of  the  world,”  but  “  hon¬ 
est-hearted,  possessed  of  great  courage  and  persevering  in 
his  conduct.”  He  was  born  on  the  8th  of  May,  1800,  in 
a  little  fishing  town  in  the  county  of  Cornwall.  His  father, 
a  captain  of  a  small  trading  vessel,  was  drowned  before 
William  was  born.  As  a  boy  Lovett  received  some  school¬ 
ing  in  a  rather  suffocating  religious  atmosphere. 

My  poor  mother,  [he  writes  of  his  boyhood],  like  too  many 
serious  persons  of  the  present  day,  thought  that  the  great  power 
that  has  formed  the  numerous  gay,  sportive,  singing  things  of 
earth  and  air,  must  above  all  things  be  gratified  with  the  solemn 
faces,  prim  clothes,  and  half  sleepy  demeanor  of  human  beings ; 
and  that  true  religion  consists  in  listening  to  the  reiterated 
story  of  man’s  fall,  of  God’s  anger  for  his  doing  so,  of  man’s 
sinful  nature,  of  the  redemption,  and  of  other  questionable 
matters,  instead  of  the  wonders  and  glories  of  the  universe.1 

In  his  early  youth,  he  was  apprenticed  to  a  rope-maker 
for  a  term  of  seven  years.  His  master,  however,  soon 
gave  up  his  indentures,  and  Lovett  turned  to  fishing 
and  other  trades.  On  the  23rd  of  June  1821,  he  went 
to  London  where,  after  some  struggles  and  adventures, 
he  became  a  cabinet-maker.  In  1828,  he  joined  the 
“  First  London  Cooperative  Trading  Association”  and  soon 
afterwards  accepted  the  position  of  store-keeper  in  this  asso¬ 
ciation.  He  was  also  a  prominent  member  of  the  “  Brit¬ 
ish  Association  for  Promoting  Cooperative  Knowledge.” 


1  William  Lovett,  Life  and  Struggles,  pp.  7-8. 


THE  LEADERS 


103 


103] 

At  that  time  he  believed  that  the  gradual  accumulation  of 
capital,  by  means  of  cooperative  trading  associations,  might 
ultimately  enable  the  working  classes  to  get  the  industries 
and  commerce  of  the  country  in  their  own  hands.  He  also 
accepted  Robert  Owen’s  doctrine  of  community  of  property : 

The  idea  of  all  the  powers  of  machinery,  of  all  the  arts  and 
inventions  of  men,  being  applied  for  the  benefit  of  all  in  com¬ 
mon,  to  the  lightening  of  their  toil  and  the  increase  of  their 
comforts,  is  one  the  most  captivating  to  those  who  accept  the 
idea  without  investigation.  The  prospect  of  having  spacious 
halls,  gardens,  libraries,  and  museums,  at  their  command ;  of 
having  light  alternate  labor  in  field  or  factory ;  of  seeing  their 
children  educated,  provided  and  cared  for  at  the  public  ex¬ 
pense  ;  of  having  no  fear  or  care  of  poverty  themselves ;  nor 
for  wife,  children,  or  friends  they  might  leave  behind  them; 
is  one  the  most  cheering  and  consolatory  to  an  enthusiastic 
mind.  I  was  one  who  accepted  this  grand  idea  of  machinery 
working  for  the  benefit  of  all.1 

In  1830,  he  was  active  in  the  formation  of  the  “  Metropoli¬ 
tan  Political  Union,”  whose  object  was  “  to  obtain  by  every 
just,  legal,  constitutional  and  peaceful  means  an  effectual 
and  radical  reform  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament.” 
He  was  also  connected  with  the  “unstamped”  agitation  which 
originated  the  cheap  political  newspapers  and  pamphlets. 
In  1831,  he  refused  to  serve  in  the  militia,  as  he  explained 
it,  “  on  the  ground  of  not  being  represented  in  Parliament 
and  of  not  having  any  voice  or  vote  in  the  election  of  those 
persons  who  made  those  laws  that  compelled  me  to  take 
up  arms  to  protect  the  rights  and  property  of  others,  while 
my  own  rights  and  the  only  property  I  had,  my  labor,  were 
not  protected.”  2  The  same  year,  he  joined  “The  National 

1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  43-44. 

3  Ibid.,  p.  66. 


104 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[104 

Union  of  the  Working  Classes  and  Others/’  which  declared 
labor  the  “  source  of  wealth  ”  and  aimed  at  “  the  protection 
of  the  working  men;  the  free  disposal  of  the  produce  of 
labor;  and  effectual  reform  of  the  Commons’  House  of 
Parliament;  the  repeal  of  all  bad  laws;  the  enactment  of  a 
wise  and  comprehensive  code  of  laws;  and  to  collect  and 
organize  a  peaceful  expression  of  public  opinion.”  This 
association,  also  known  as  the  Rotundists,  was  denounced 
by  the  Tory  and  Whig  press  as  consisting  of  “  destructives, 
revolutionists,  pickpockets,  and  incendiaries;  meditating  an 
attack  upon  every  possessor  of  property,  and  the  uprooting 
of  all  law  and  order.”  The  rapid  success  of  the  Trades 
Unions  in  1834,  and  especially  of  the  Consolidated  National 
Trades  Union,  led  to  the  dissolution  of  the  National  Union 
of  the  Working  Classes.  After  the  trade  union  movement 
was  crushed  by  the  manufacturers  and  the  government, 
Lovett,  who  enjoyed  an  enviable  reputation  among  the 
London  reformers,  succeeded,  together  with  a  number  of 
other  radicals,  in  the  effort  to  organize  the  London 
Working  Men’s  Association.  He  had  at  that  time  re¬ 
nounced  some  of  his  ultra-radical  ideas  and  adopted  the 
policy  of  Francis  Place,  the  wire-puller.  He  was  an  able 
organizer  and,  as  its  secretary,  soon  became  the  heart  and 
soul  of  the  association. 

As  the  author  of  the  People’s  Charter,  Lovett  undoubt¬ 
edly  exerted  an  influence  on  the  movement.  At  no  stage, 
however,  was  he  regarded  as  a  popular  leader.  For  that 
he  lacked  both  intellect  and  pliability.  He  was  an  idealist, 
ready  to  incur  peril  and  obloquy  for  his  principles,  but  his 
mentality  was  of  a  static  nature.  In  all  his  Chartist  career 
he  never  swerved  from  the  path  which  the  London  Work¬ 
ing  Men’s  Association  had  laid  out  in  1836.  Utterly  in¬ 
capable  of  being  swayed  by  sentiment  or  emotion,  he  lacked 
completely  the  instinct  and  the  foresight  of  a  born  leader. 


THE  LEADERS 


105 


105] 

Honest  he  was,  indeed,  and  courageous,  but  it  was  the 
honesty  and  courage  of  a  fanatic.  He  scrupled  to  yield 
to  the  popular  clamor  for  physical  force,  but  his  scruples  did 
not  spring  from  the  source  of  moral  opulence.  Obscured 
by  men  of  greater  power  of  leadership,  he  was  ever  full  of 
suspicion  and  when  forced  to  make  some  compromise,  he 
begrudged  it  all  his  life.  “  His  fault  was,”  testifies  one  of 
his  admirers,  “  that  he  had  too  much  suspicion  of  the 
motives  of  others  not  taking  his  view  of  things.”  1  He  was 
gentle  and  not  spiteful,  but  he  never  bowed  to  anybody,  nor 
allowed  himself  to  be  treated  as  a  common  mortal.  His 
errors  he  attributed  to  the  goodness  of  his  heart  and  never 
to'  the  weakness  of  his  mind.  Such  was  the  make-up  of  the 
man  who  was  considered  by  most  writers  the  noblest  ex¬ 
ponent  of  the  Chartist  movement. 

Feargus  O'Connor  was  a  man  of  a  diametrically  opposite 
calibre.  Loved  and  worshipped  by  millions,  hated  by  many, 
but  despised  by  none,  he  was  a  man  who  could  fairly  say 
of  himself :  “  It  is  my  boast  that  neither  the  living  denouncer 
nor  the  unborn  historian  can  ever  write  of  Chartism,  leaving 
out  the  name  of  Feargus  O'Connor.”  2  He  was  born  July 
16,1794,  and  was  the  son  of  Roger  O'Connor,  who  suffered 
imprisonment  for  his  activity  in  the  movement  of  the 
“United  Irishmen.”  He  was  always  proud  of  his  descent 
which  he  traced  to  Roderick  O’Connor,  the  last  king  of 
Ireland.  He  attended  grammar-school  and  Trinity  College 
at  Dublin,  but  took  no  degree. 

He  was  called  to  the  Irish  Bar,  but  lived  with  his 
brothers  on  their  father’s  estate,  and  was,  as  he  says, 
“  on  the  turf  in  a  small  way."  He  appeared  on  the 

1  George  Jacob  Holyoake,  Sixty  Years  of  an  Agitator’s  Life,  London, 
1900,  vol.  ii,  p.  269. 

2  The  Laborer,  1847,  vol.  i,  p.  176. 


x  o6  THE  CHAR  TIST  MO  V  EM  ENT  [  1 06 

political  scene  at  the  age  of  thirty-seven.  A  barrister 
by  education,  an  orator  of  the  first  rank,  and  a  man 
of  athletic  physical  strength,  he  was  a  great  prize  for 
O’Connell’s  party  in  Ireland.  He  was  elected  to  Parliament 
in  1833  for  the  County  of  Cork.  While  in  Parliament, 
he  repudiated  the  unscrupulous  policy  of  his  chief,  Daniel 
O’Connell,  who,  on  his  part,  could  not  brook  anyone  who 
was  potentially  fit  to  share  his  power  or  popularity.  O’Con¬ 
nell  frequently  yielded  to  the  Whigs  with  a  view  of  secur¬ 
ing  a  chance  for  his  party.  O’Connor  denounced  such  tac¬ 
tics  and  frequently  went  out  of  his  way  to  frustrate  the 
plans  of  the  Irish  leader.  He  was  re-elected  in  1835,  but 
was  unseated  owing  to  his  want  of  the  necessary  property 
qualification.  It  was  at  that  time  that  an  open  quarrel  took 
place  between  him  and  O’Connell,  who  made  “  a  present  of 
him  to  the  English  radicals.”  The  latter  received  him  with 
open  arms.  Coming  as  he  did  from  a  family  of  famous 
Irish  patriots,  his  name  alone  would  have  given  great 
prestige  to  any  radical  group.  But  O’Connor  possessed,  in 
addition,  a  rich  stock  of  personal  qualifications  for  leader¬ 
ship.  A  giant  of  over  six  feet  in  height,  with  features 
which  revealed  great  intellectual  vigor,  of  aristocratic  man¬ 
ner  and  deportment,  his  whole  countenance  was  such  as  to 
strike  awe  into  the  masses.  He  was  a  man  of  unbounded 
energy  and,  after  he  was  unseated  in  1835,  he  selected  the 
manufacturing  districts  for  his  agitation  against  the  New 
Poor  Law  and  the  Factory  System.  On  his  tour  he 
founded  many  political  unions  which  ultimately  associated 
themselves  with  the  Chartists.  It  was  on  account  of  that 
tour  that  Francis  Place  characterized  him  as  the  traveling 
leader  of  the  Democratic  Movement.  In  1836  he  founded 
the  Central  Committee  of  radical  unions.  In  1837  he  was 
wrought  up  by  the  invitation  which  the  London  Working- 
Men’s  Association  had  extended  to  Daniel  O’Connell  as  one 


THE  LEADERS 


10  7 


107] 

of  the  radical  Parliamentary  members,1  and  he  denounced 
the  association  for  its  alleged  readiness  to  leave  the  interests 
of  the  workingmen  in  the  hands  of  the  middle  class.  On 
November  18,  1837,  he  founded  the  most  radical  Chartist 
weekly,  the  Northern  Star,  whose  circulation  soon  reached 
sixty  thousand.  This  unusual  circulation  testifies  to  the 
great  popularity  which  O’Connor  enjoyed  among  the  masses. 
He  was  literally  worshipped  by  his  followers  and  many 
“  would  have  gone  through  fire  and  water  for  him.” 

There  was  much  that  was  attractive  in  him  when  I  first  knew 
him  [writes  one  of  the  Chartists].  His  fine  manly  form  and 
his  powerful  baritone  voice  gave  him  great  advantage  as  a 
popular  leader.  His  conversation  was  rich  in  Irish  humor, 
and  often  evinced  a  shrewd  knowledge  of  character.  The  fact 
of  his  having  been  in  the  House  of  Commons,  and  among  the 
upper  classes,  also  lent  him  influence.  I  do  not  think  half  a 
dozen  Chartists  cared  a  fig  about  his  boasted  descent  from 
“  Roderick  O’Connor,  the  king  of  Connaught,  and  last  king 
of  all  Ireland  ” ;  but  the  connection  of  his  family  with  the 
United  Irishmen  and  patriotic  sufferers  of  the  last  century, 
rendered  him  a  natural  representative  of  the  cause  of  political 
liberty.2 

In  his  career  as  a  Chartist,  O’Connor  displayed  qualities 
which,  in  the  eyes  of  many  contemporaries  and  historians, 
branded  him  as  a  demagogue,  a  despot,  a  political  denouncer, 
a  man  who  was  looking  solely  for  self-aggrandizement  and 
for  personal  interests.  Lovett,  who  could  hardly  tolerate 
the  presence  of  O’Connor,  once  said  to  him,  “  You  are  the 
great  ‘  I  am  ’  of  politics.”  Bronterre  nicknamed  him 
“  the  dictator  ” ;  Roebuck  called  him  “  a  cowardly  and 
malignant  demagogue,”  “  a  rogue  and  a  liar”;  Place  said 

1  Cf.  supra,  p.  90. 

1  The  Life  of  Thomas  Cooper,  written  by  himself,  London,  1897,  p. 


179. 


I0g  THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [108 

of  him  that  he  would  use  every  means  he  could  to  lead  and 
mislead  the  working  people.  Historians,  too,  characterize 
him  as  an  empty  braggart  and  a  typical  demagogue.  This 
is  as  one-sided  as  it  is  unjust.  It  was  as  natural  for  him 
to  “  dictate  ”,  as  it  was  for  others  to  follow.  It  was  his 
great  personality  that  impressed  itself  on  others.  But  he 
was  as  large-hearted  as  any  man  could  be.  He  was,  as  he 
himself  testified,  “  of  an  enthusiastic  and  excitable  disposi¬ 
tion'.”  1  At  the  same  time  he  was  the  “  most  impetuous  and 
most  patient  of  all  the  tribunes  who  ever  led  the  English 
Chartists.”  2  A  born  leader,  he  possessed  great  power  of 
reading  the  minds  of  the  people  and  of  designing  his  plans  of 
action  according  to  conditions  and  circumstances.  This 
often  made  him  yield  to  popular  clamor;  but  this  is  the  lot 
of  every  great  leader  who  can  feel  the  pulse  of  the  masses. 
He  was  vain  and  lacked  modesty  when  speaking  of  himself ; 
but  he  was  in  no  less  a  degree  ready  to  exaggerate  the 
greatness  of  others.  He  could  with  a  sense  of  self-detach¬ 
ment  say  of  himself  that  he  “  led  the  people  from  madness 
to  sanity,”  as  he  could  speak  of  Bronterre’s  “  gigantic  tal¬ 
ents.”  Holyoake  acknowledges  O’Connor’s  “great  strength 
of  indifference  to  what  any  one  of  his  rivals  said  against 
him  in  his  own  columns  of  the  Star.”  3  He  had  a  deep 
passion  for  freedom  and,  on  more  than  one  occasion  and  in 
various  forms  of  self-sacrifice,  he  proved  his  genuine  de¬ 
votion  to  the  cause.  He  was  called  the  Lion  of  Freedom, 
and  the  name  was  well  merited. 

During  the  first  period  of  the  Chartist  agitation,  O'Connor 
cherished  no  special  theories  of  his  own.  His  Land  Plan 
came  at  a  later  stage.  But  even  as  early  as  1835,  he  gave 
notice  of  his  intention  to  move  in  Parliament  for  leave  to 
bring  in  a  bill 

1  See  English  Chartist  Circular,  vol.  i,  no.  36. 

2  See  Holyoake,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  106.  zIbid.,  p.  107. 


THE  LEADERS 


109 


109] 

to  compel  landlords  to  make  leases  of  their  land  in  perpetuity — 
that  is,  to  give  to  the  tenant  a  lease  for  ever,  at  a  corn  rent; 
to  take  away  the  power  of  distraining  for  rent;  and  in  all 
cases  where  land  was  held  upon  lease  and  was  too  dear,  that  the 
tenant  in  such  cases  should  have  the  power  of  empaneling  a 
jury  to  assess  the  real  value  in  the  same  manner  as  the  crown 
has  the  power  of  making  an  individual  sell  property  required 
for  what  is  called  public  works  or  conveniences  according  to 
the  valuation  of  a  jury.1 

He  believed  that  “  the  law  of  primogeniture  is  the  eld¬ 
est  son  of  class  legislation  upon  corruption  by  idleness.”  2 
But  unlike  most  of  his  Chartist  colleagues,  he  was  a  strenu¬ 
ous  opponent  of  the  current  Socialist  theories. 

I  have  ever  been,  and  I  think  I  ever  shall  be  opposed  to  the 
principles  of  communism,  as  advocated  by  several  theorists. 
I  am,  nevertheless,  a  strong  advocate  of  co-operation,  which 
means  legitimate  exchange,  and  which  circumstances  would 
compel  individuals  to  adopt,  to  the  extent  that  communism 
would  be  beneficial.  I  have  generally  found  that  the  strongest 
advocates  of  communism  are  the  most  lazy  members  of  so¬ 
ciety, — a  class  who  would  make  a  division  of  labor,  adjudging 
to  the  most  pliant  and  submissive  the  lion’s  share  of  work, 
and  contending  that  their  natural  implement  was  the  brain, 
whilst  that  of  the  credulous  was  the  spade,  the  plough,  the 
sledge  and  the  pickaxe.  Communism  either  destroys  whole¬ 
some  emulation  and  competition,  or  else  it  fixes  too  high  a 
price  upon  distinction,  and  must  eventually  end  in  the  worst 
description  of  despotism  .  .  .  whilst,  upon  the  other  hand,  in¬ 
dividual  possession  and  cooperation  of  labor  creates  a  whole¬ 
some  bond  between  all  classes  of  society.3 

1  The  English  Chartist  Circular,  vol.  ii,  no.  67. 

2  See  Feargus  O’Connor,  The  Remedy  for  National  Poverty  Impend¬ 
ing  National  Ruin ,  1841. 

3  The  Laborer ,  1847,  vol.  i,  p.  149. 


no 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[no 

As  land  was,  in  his  opinion,  the  only  source  of  all  wealth 
so  was  the  unrestricted  use  of  machinery  the  only  source  of 
all  social  evil : 1 

It  opens  a  fictitious,  unsettled,  and  unwholesome  market  for 
labor,  leaving  to  the  employer  complete  and  entire  control  over 
wages  and  employment.  As  machinery  becomes  improved, 
manual  labor  is  dispensed  with,  and  the  dismissed  constitute 
a  surplus  population  of  unemployed,  system-made  paupers, 
which  makes  a  reserve  for  the  masters  to  fall  back  upon,  as  a 
means  of  reducing  the  price  of  labor.  It  makes  character 
valueless.  By  the  application  of  fictitious  money,  it  overruns 
the  world  with  produce,  and  makes  labor  a  drug.  It  entices 
the  agricultural  laborer,  under  false  pretences,  from  the  na¬ 
tural  and  wholesome  market,  and  locates  him  in  an  unhealthy 
atmosphere,  where  human  beings  herd  together  like  swine.  It 
destroys  the  value  of  real  capital  in  the  market,  and  is  capable 
of  affecting  every  trade,  business,  and  interest,  though  appar¬ 
ently  wholly  unconnected  with  its  ramifications.  It  creates  a 
class  of  tyrants  and  a  class  of  slaves.  Its  vast  connection  with 
banks,  and  all  the  moneyed  interests  of  the  country,  gives  to 
it  an  unjust,  injurious,  anomalous,  and  direct  influence  over 
the  government  of  the  country. 

It  was  not,  however,  to  the  strength  of  his  theories  that 
O’Connor  looked  for  recognition.  It  was  his  harangues 
against  the  New  Poor  Law  and  the  Factory  System  that 
electrified  the  masses.  Coming  as  he  did  in  direct  contact 
with  the  masses  and  witnessing  their  distress  in  all  parts  of 
the  country,  he  was  from  the  beginning  of  the  Chartist 
movement  inclined  toward  a  revolutionary  policy.  To 
counterbalance  the  influence  of  the  London  Working  Men’s 
Association  which,  according  to  O’Connor,  consisted  of 
skilled  mechanics,  he  founded  in  1837  the  London  Demo- 


1  The  English  Chartist  Circular,  no.  62. 


THE  LEADERS 


III 


III] 

cratic  Association,  appealing  to  the  “  unshaven  chins,  blis¬ 
tered  hands,  and  fustian  jackets  ”  for  membership.  The 
objects,  besides  universal  suffrage,  included  the  agitation 
for  liberty  of  the  press,  the  repeal  of  the  Poor  Law,  an 
eight-hour  labor  day,  and  the  prohibition  of  child  labor. 
This  association  eventually  became  the  mouthpiece  of  the 
physical  force  Chartists,  disseminating  the  spirit  of  revolt 
all  over  the  country.  “  In  the  Democratic  Association  ”, 
it  was  subsequently  stated  in  its  official  organ,  “  the  Jacobin 
Club  again  lives  and  flourishes,  and  the  villainous  tyrants 
shall  find  to  their  cost,  that  England  too  has  her  Marats, 
St.  Justs,  and  Robespierres  ’V  O’Connor,  however,  never 
identified  himself  with  the  extreme  wing  of  the  terrorists 
and  once  he  even  repudiated  the  latter  in  his  characteristic 
vein.1  2 

I  have  always  been  a  man  of  peace.  I  have  always  denounced 
the  man  who  strove  to  tamper  with  an  oppressed  people  by  any 
appeal  to  physical  force.  I  have  always  said  that  moral  force 
was  the  degree  of  deliberation  in  each  man’s  mind  which  told 
him  when  submission  was  a  duty  or  resistance  not  a  crime ;  and 
that  a  true  application  of  moral  force  would  effect  every 
change,  but  that  in  case  it  should  fail,  physical  force  would 
come  to  its  aid  like  an  electric  shock — and  no  man  could  prevent 
it;  but  that  he  who  advised  or  attempted  to  marshal  it  would 
be  the  first  to  desert  it  at  the  moment  of  danger.  God  forbid 
that  I  should  wish  to  see  my  country  plunged  into  the  horrors 
of  physical  revolution.  I  wish  her  to  win  her  liberties  by  peace¬ 
ful  means  alone. 

His  apprehension  of  a  “  physical  revolution  ”  did  not, 
nevertheless,  in  the  least  mitigate  his  contempt  for  those 
who  counseled  inactivity  and  “education”.  He  fully  realized 

1  The  London  Democrat,  no.  2,  1839. 

2  The  Nonconformist,  June  8,  1842. 


II 2 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[  1 12 

that  there  were  two  parties  to  the  bargain ;  that,  besides  the 
poor  fellow,  there  was  also  the  rich  man  who  was  reluctant 
to  be  “  educated  ”  in  detriment  to  his  personal  interests. 
In  his  speeches,  as  well  as  in  his  “  Star,”  he  repeatedly  up¬ 
braided  the  people  for  having  borne  oppression  too  long 
and  too  tamely,  reminding  them  that  “  it  is  better  to  die 
free  men  than  to  live  slaves.”  Professing  his  faith  in  the 
moral  power  of  the  working  class  to  establish  the  rights  of 
the  poor  man ,  he  used  his  intrepid  eloquence  and  sallies  of 
wit  to  bring  the  masses  to  the  very  pit  of  revolution. 

James  Bronterre  O’Brien,  widely  known  as  Bronterre, 
was  born  in  1805  and  was  the  son  of  a  wine  merchant  and 
tobacco  manufacturer.  In  childhood  he  displayed  extra¬ 
ordinary  abilities  and,  at  the  age  of  ten,  he  knew  Latin, 
Greek,  French  and  Italian,  besides  his  native  language.  In 
the  private  school  which  was  conducted  by  Lowell  Edge- 
worth,  a  brother  of  the  writer,  on  the  monitor  system,  he 
showed  remarkable  proficiency  in  mathematics  and  a  fine 
appreciation  of  literature  and  poetry.  Walter  Scott,  who 
had  heard  of  the  boy-prodigy,  went  to  see  him  in  school 
and  was  filled  with  admiration.  He  also  distinguished  him¬ 
self  in  Trinity  College  at  Dublin,  where  he  received  the  de¬ 
gree  of  Bachelor  of  Arts,  and  at  Gray's  Inn  in  London 
where  he  was  qualifying  himself  for  the  bar.  He  was 
twenty-five  years  of  age  when  he  was  introduced  by  4 4  Ora¬ 
tor  ”  Henry  Hunt  to  the  radicals  of  London  as  a  young 
gentleman  of  great  abilities,  whose  sympathies  were  entirely 
with  the  people.  In  the  account  which  he  gave  of  himself 
in  the  first  number  of  his  44  National  Reformer,”  January 
7,  1837,  he  says: 

About  eight  years  ago,  I  came  to  London  to  study  law  and 
radical  reform.  My  friends  sent  me  to  study  law;  I  took 
to  radical  reform  on  my  own  account.  I  was  a  very  short 


THE  LEADERS 


113] 


113 


time  engaged  in  both  studies,  when  I  found  the  law  was  all 
fiction  and  rascality,  and  that  radical  reform  was  all  truth  and 
matter  of  dire  necessity.  Having  a  natural  love  of  truth,  and 
as  natural  a  hatred  of  falsehood,  I  soon  got  sick  of  law,  and 
gave  all  my  soul  to  radical  reform.  The  consequence  is,  that 
while  I  have  made  no  progress  at  all  in  law,  I  have  made 
immense  progress  in  radical  reform,  so  much  so,  that  were  a 
professorship  of  radical  reform  to  be  instituted  in  King’s 
College,  I  think  I  would  stand  candidate  for  the  office.  At  all 
events,  I  feel  as  though  every  drop  of  blood  in  my  veins  was 
radical  blood,  and  as  if  the  very  food  I  swallow  undergoes,  at 
the  moment  of  deglutition,  a  process  of  radicalization. 


He  started  his  literary  career  in  1830,  over  the  signature 
of  Bronterre,  in  Carpenter's  Political  Pamphlets.  His 
articles  soon  attracted  the  attention  of  the  radicals,  and, 
at  the  age  of  twenty-six,  he  became  the  chief  editor  of  the 
Poor  Man's  Guardian.  He  was  a  prolific  writer  and 
during  the  thirties  was  an  important  contributor  or  editor 
of  many  magazines,  including  the  Midland  Representative , 
People's  Conservative,  Carpenter’s  Political  Pamphlets  and 
Political  Herald,  Poor  Man's  Guardian,  The  Destructive, 
Twopenny  Despatch,  London  Mercury,  National  Reformer, 
The  Operative,  Southern  Star,  Northern  Star,  and  others. 
In  1836  he  translated  Buonarroti's  History  of  Babeufs  Con¬ 
spiracy  for  Equality,  and,  after  his  visit  to  Paris,  published, 
in  1837,  The  Life  of  Robespierre,  in  which,  in  defiance  of 
all  prejudice,  he  depicted  the  great  revolutionist  as  one  of 
the  noblest  and  most  enlightened  reformers  that  the  world 
ever  had.  He  remained  all  his  life  a  great  admirer  of 
Robespierre  and  Babeuf. 

The  talents  of  Bronterre  were  greatly  exaggerated  by 
many  of  his  followers,  who  ranked  him  as  a  genius,  but  they 
were  great  enough  to  put  him  head  and  shoulders  above 
the  average  leader  of  workingmen.  The  title  of  “  School 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


114 


[114 


Master”  bestowed  on  him  for  his  learning  by  O'Connor  was 
fully  merited.  As  a  leader,  he  combined  many  happy  char¬ 
acteristics.  He  was  a  dreamer  and  full  of  temperament, 
less  erratic  than  O’Connor  and  more  pliant  than  Lovett. 
Tall,  somewhat  stooping,  with  a  fine  intellectual  cast  of 
head  and  features,  forcible  with  his  tongue  not  less  than 
with  his  pen,  he  exerted  a  great  influence  on  the  masses  as 
well  as  on  the  leaders.  The  goal  which  he  set  out  to  achieve 
was  “  social  equality  for  each  and  all.”  But  in  order  to 
obtain  social  equality,  the  people  had  first  to  get  political 
equality.  Political  supremacy  was  the  foundation  of  the 
whole  economic  structure.  Social  theories  were,  therefore, 
“  useless  ”  until  the  Charter  became  the  law  of  the  land. 
At  the  beginning  of  his  radical  career  he  referred  to  the 
Houses  of  Parliament  in  the  following  terms :  1 

They  might  abolish  or  remodel  every  institution  in  Church 
and  State ;  they  might  change  the  whole  system  of  commerce ; 
they  might  substitute  the  labor  note  for  the  present  vicious 
currency  and  thus  render  usury  impossible ;  they  might  agree 
to  work  in  common,  and  to  enjoy  in  common;  or  they  might 
arrange  to  exchange  their  produce  on  equitable  terms,  through 
salaried  agents,  without  die  intervention  of  base  middlemen 
who  are  the  bane  of  society.  By  these  and  the  like  means  they 
might  silently,  but  effectually,  regenerate  the  world. 


This  view  was  elaborated  by  Bronterre  in  his  writings 
during  the  Chartist  agitation.  The  acquisition  of  universal 
suffrage  was,  therefore,  imperative  in  order  that  the  work¬ 
ing  class  may  reconstruct  the  whole  basis  of  society.  This 
became  his  idee  fixe : 


Without  the  franchise  you  can  have  nothing  but  what  others 
choose  to  give  you,  and  those  who  give  to-day,  may  choose  to 

1  The  Poor  Man’s  Guardian,  March  1,  1834. 


THE  LEADERS 


1 J5] 


115 


take  away  to-morrow.  Every  industrious  man  who  produces 
more  (in  value)  of  the  goods  of  life  than  he  needs  for  his 
own  or  his  family’s  use,  ought  to  own  the  difference  as  prop¬ 
erty.  You  are  almost  all  in  that  condition,  for  there  are  few 
of  you  who  do  not  yield  more  value  to  society  every  day  than 
society  gives  you  back  in  return.  Why  are  you  not  masters  of 
the  difference?  Why  is  it  not  your  property?  Because  cer¬ 
tain  laws  and  institutions,  which  other  people  make,  take  it 
away  from  you,  and  give  it  to  the  law-makers.  But  if  you 
were  represented  as  well  as  they ,  you  would  have  quite  other 
laws  and  institutions,  which  would  give  the  wealth  to  those 
who  earned  it.1 


Bronterre  was  an  ardent  advocate  of  nationalization  of 


land.  In  1837  he  advanced  the  basic  points  which 


sequently  developed  into  a  theory  of  his  own : 

1.  The  absolute  dominion,  or  allodial  right  to  the  soil,  belongs 
to  the  nation  only. 

2.  The  nation  alone  has  the  just  power  of  leasing  out  the 
land  for  cultivation,  and  of  appropriating  the  rents  accruing 
therefrom. 

3.  The  size  of  farms,  or  the  portion  of  soil  to  be  allotted  to 
individuals  or  families ;  also  the  proportions  to  be  devoted  to 
tillage,  pasturage,  etc. — also  the  several  other  powers  now  pos¬ 
sessed  by  individual  owners,  and  exercised  by  them  in  the 
granting  of  leases,  etc. — all  these  are  matters  which  it  also 
belongs  to  the  nation  alone  to  determine  in  virtue  of  its  rights 
as  absolute  landlord  of  all. 

4.  Upon  this  theory  every  subject  of  the  realm  is  a  part 
proprietor  of  the  soil.  The  land  being  leased  out  by  public 
auction,  whoever  bids  highest  for  a  lot  should  get  it,  because 
the  nation  would  thereby  be  the  gainer,  and  as  population  in¬ 
creased,  and  the  land  became  in  consequence  more  valuable, 
rents  would  increase  also,  and  people’s  inheritance  be  made 
greater.2 

1  Bronterre’s  National  Reformer ,  January  15,  1837. 

2  Ibid.,  Feb.  25,  1837. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


Il6 


[  1 1 6 


His  hostility  towards  the  middle  class,  the  “  money- 
monster  ”,  did  not  entirely  blind  him  to  the  advantages  of 
machinery.  Nor  did  he  believe  with  O’Connor  that  land 
was  the  only  source  of  all  wealth : 


The  system  I  combat,  and  which  I  wish  you  to  combat,  is 
that  by  which  your  profit-mongering  oppressors  have  turned 
you  from  agriculturists  into  manufacturers  for  all  the  world. 
Now,  I  am  not  against  manufactures,  nor  against  the  fine  arts, 
nor  against  even  the  largest  possible  extension  and  application 
of  both  to  the  purpose  of  human  economy,  but  I  am  against 
the  system  which  would  first  make  these  paramount  to  agricul¬ 
ture,  and  then  bestow  all  the  advantages  of  both  on  an  upstart 
moneyed  aristocracy,  who,  in  drawing  you  from  off  the  land, 
have  made  you  more  abject  slaves  to  their  cupidity,  than  your 
forefathers  ever  were  to  the  feudal  barons  of  the  Middle  Ages. 
Agriculture  is  the  most  profitable  of  all  pursuits,  to  a  nation 
considered  aggregately;  even  now,  when  scarcely  any  machin¬ 
ery  is  applied  to  husbandry,  it  is  a  well  known  fact  that  one 
laborer  produces  food  for  four  persons.  How  much  more  he 
might  produce,  I  leave  any  one  to  infer,  who  has  ever  seen 
the  rich  garden  grounds  about  Chelsea,  Fulham,  Kensington, 
and  Hammersmith.  Is  it  not  monstrous,  then,  that  with  this 
power  of  production,  and  with  sixty  millions  of  acres  of  land 
in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  of  which  not  ten  millions  are 
unsusceptible  of  cultivation,  we  should  see  thousands  of  arti¬ 
sans  in  our  great  towns,  either  wholly  destitute  of  employ¬ 
ment,  or  eking  out  a  miserable  existence  on  starving  wages,  and 
subject  to  all  the  brutalizing  privations  of  health,  air,  and  hap¬ 
piness,  to  which  their  dependence  on  the  profit-monger  and 
his  foreign  markets  hourly  subjects  them?  ...  It  is  not  gold 
and  silver,  nor  yet  bank  notes,  as  the  paper-money  schemers 
would  have  us  believe,  that  have  given  the  prodigious  impulse 
we  have  witnessed,  to  improvements  in  America.  It  is  the 
abundance  of  food  produced  by  its  agricultural  population, 
that  enables  so  great  a  number  to  be  employed  in  constructing 


N 


THE  LEADERS 


ii  7 


1 17] 

canals,  bridges,  railroads,  etc.  The  surplus  of  agricultural 
produce  is  the  real  capital  which  sets  the  artisans  and  handi¬ 
craftsmen  to  work,  and  covers  the  States  with  those  embellish¬ 
ments  and  stupendous  works  of  art  which  astound  the  Euro¬ 
pean  traveler.1 

It  was  observations  like  the  above  that  led  him  to  con¬ 
clude  that  land  could  never  be  a  “  legitimate  subject  of 
property  ”,  and  that  had  it  not  been  for  individual  owner¬ 
ship  of  land,  “  we  should  have  escaped  ninety-nine  hun¬ 
dredths  od  all  the  woes  and  crimes  that  have  hitherto  made 
a  pandemonium  of  the  world.”  2  He  put  land  in  a  class  by 
itself.  All  other  property  could  be  held  by  individuals  in 
perfect  compatibility  with  public  happiness  and  social  justice. 

If  all  men  are  placed  equal  before  the  law — if  the  means  of 
acquiring  and  retaining  wealth  are  equally  secured  to  all  in 
proportion  to  the  respective  industry  and  services  of  each,  I 
see  no  objection  to  private  property.  Every  man  has  a  right 
to  the  value  of  his  own  produce  or  services,  be  they  more  or 
less.  If  one  man  can  and  will  do  twice  the  work  of  another 
man,  he  ought  certainly  in  justice  to  have  twice  the  reward. 
But  if  his  superior  strength  or  skill  gives  him  the  means  of 
acquiring  more  wealth  than  his  neighbor,  it  by  no  means  fol¬ 
lows  that  he  ought,  therefore,  to  acquire  a  right  or  power 
over  his  neighbor’s  produce  as  well  as  his  own.  And  here 
lies  the  grand  evil  of  society — it  is  not  in  private  property,  but 
in  the  unjust  and  atrocious  powers  with  which  the  existing 
laws  of  all  countries  invest  it.  If  a  man  has  fairly  earned  a 
hundred  or  a  thousand  pound’s  worth  of  wealth  beyond  what 
he  has  consumed  or  spent,  he  has  a  sacred  right  to  the  ex¬ 
clusive  use  of  it,  if  he  thinks  proper;  but  he  has  no  right 
to  use  that  wealth  in  such  a  way  as  to  make  it  a  sort  of 
sucking  pump,  or  thumb-screw  for  sucking  and  screwing  other 

^ronterre’s  National  Reformer,  January  7,  1837. 

2  The  Operative,  vol.  i,  no.  4,  1838. 


Il8  THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [n8 

people’s  produce  into  his  possession.  Sir  John  Cam  Hobhouse, 
for  example,  .  .  .  has  no  just  right  to  employ  his  money  in 
usury  or  speculation.  His  money  should  not  be  allowed  to 
grow  money  as  cabbage  grows  cabbage,  or  weeds  grow  weeds. 
To  employ  money  in  that  way  is  not  to  use  the  right  of  prop¬ 
erty,  but  to  practice  robbery.  .  .  .  He  takes  advantage  of  his 
‘  capital,’  and  the  poverty  that  surrounds  him.  He  says  to 
the  hungry  man,  Come  and  labor  for  me,  create  fresh  wealth 
for  me,  and  you  shall  have  a  small  share  of  your  produce  to 
keep  you  alive.  .  .  .  The  laborer  can  stand  anything  before 
hunger.  Hence,  Sir  John  grows  richer  and  richer  every  day, 
without  earning  any  riches  at  all,  while  he  who  produces  the 
riches  grows  poorer  and  poorer,  as  age  diminishes  his  strength, 
till  at  last  he  dies  in  poverty  and  in  the  workhouse.  .  .  .  The 
employers  of  labor  and  the  exchangers  of  wealth  are  alone 
considered  in  the  laws.  The  producers  and  active  distributors 
are  only  thought  of  as  slaves  or  criminals.  Enormous  fleets 
and  armies  are  kept  up  to  protect  the  merchant’s  gains.  Enor¬ 
mous  gaols  and  penitentiaries  are  kept  up  for  the  poor.  Thus 
are  the  laborers  forced  to  pay,  not  only  for  the  protection  of 
those  who  plunder  them,  but  for  the  very  instruments  of  their 
own  torture  and  misery.  Buonarroti  considers  all  these  results 
inseparable  from  private  property.  So  did  Babeuf — so  did 
thousands  of  the  French  Democrats  of  1793 — so  do  Robert 
Owen  and  his  disciples  of  the  present  day.  I  think  differ¬ 
ently.  I  will  never  admit  that  private  property  is  incom¬ 
patible  with  public  happiness,  till  I  see  it  fairly  tried.  I  never 
found  an  objection  urged  against  it,  which  I  can  not  trace 
to  the  abuse ,  not  to  the  use  of  the  institution.  ...  I  assert  that 
such  [enlightened]  government  would  place  commerce  and 
manufactures  upon  a  totally  different  footing  from  the  present, 
and  make  the  land  the  common  property  of  all  the  inhabitants, 
and  that,  without  any  real  or  material  injury  to  the  existing 
proprietors.  I  hold,  and  I  am  sure  I  can  prove,  that  such  a 
dispensation  of  things  is  within  the  power  of  an  enlightened 
legislature,  fairly  representing  all  classes.1 


1  The  English  Chartist  Circular,  vol.  i,  no.  18. 


THE  LEADERS 


1 19] 


119 


Radical  and  talented  as  Bronterre  was,  his  strong  pre¬ 
dilections  for  the  views  of  Robespierre  and  Babeuf  entirely 
blurred  his  vision  of  the  evolutionary  laws  of  society.  In 
the  preface  to  his  translation  of  Buonarroti's  History  of 
Babeuf s  Conspiracy  for  Equality,  he  cites,  among  others, 
the  following  reasons  for  rendering  the  work  into  English. 

Because  Buonarroti’s  book  contains  one  of  the  best  exposi¬ 
tions  I  have  seen  of  those  great  political  and  social  principles 
which  I  have  so  long  advocated  in  the  Poor  Man  s  Guardian 
and  other  publications.  .  .  .  Society  has  been  hitherto  con¬ 
stituted  upon  no  fixed  principles.  The  state  in  which  we  find 
it  is  the  blind  result  of  chance.  Even  its  advocates  do  not 
claim  for  it  any  other  origin.  The  right  of  the  strongest — 
the  only  right  acknowledged  by  savage  man — appears  to  be 

still  the  fundamental  charter  of  all  “  civilized  ”  states . 

What  the  savage  or  uncivilized  man  does  individually  and 
directly  by  the  exercise  of  mere  personal  prowess,  the  civilized 
man  (so  called)  does  collectively  and  circuitously  by  cunningly- 
designed  institutions.  The  effects  of  these  institutions  are 
well  depicted  by  Buonarroti.  He  shows,  with  admirable  abil¬ 
ity,  how,  in  trying  to  escape  the  evils  of  savage  life,  man  has 
unconsciously  plunged  into  another  state  far  more  calamitous 
— to  wit,  the  present  artificial  state,  which  he  terms  that  of 
“  false  civilization.”  He  shows,  that  to  correct  the  evils  of 
this  latter  state,  without  at  the  same  time  retrograding  to  the 
former,  was  the  grand  problem  sought  to  be  resolved  by  the 
first  French  Revolution,  and,  in  discussing  the  principles  and 
institutions  deemed  necessary  to  that  end  by  the  leaders  of 
the  Revolution,  I  was  so  forcibly  struck  by  the  coincidence 
of  Buonarroti’s  ideas  with  my  own,  that  I  immediately  re¬ 
solved  to  translate  the  book. 


The  omnipotence  which  he  attributed  to  political  rights 
precluded  his  correct  appreciation  of  the  economic  forces 
of  society.  The  rise  of  the  middle  class  forced  his  recog¬ 
nition,  but  he  ascribed  it  to  the  political  importance  of  that 


120 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[  120 


class,  which  in  his  mind  was  merely  “  the  blind  result  of 
chance,”  and  he  sought  to  crush  the  “  money-monster  ”  with 
its  own  weapon — political  power.  In  this  respect  he  was  in 
full  accord  with  Lovett  and  his  friends  of  the  London  Work¬ 
ing  Men’s  Association,  never  tiring  of  agitating  for  uni¬ 
versal  suffrage  as  the  only  remedy  for  social  maladies. 
The  economic  role  of  the  working  class  as  a  factor  in  social 
evolution  he  neither  recognized  nor  understood. 


\ 


Thomas  Attwood  was  a  valuable  accession  to  the  Chartist 
leaders  on  account  of  his  previous  association  with  the 
Birmingham  Political  Union.  He  was  a  Birmingham 
banker,  and  his  interest  in  currency  reform  led  him  into  ac¬ 
tive  politics.  At  the  beginning  of  his  political  career,  he 
looked  with  contempt  upon  the  “poor  wretches,”  the  radicals, 
who  “  clamor  for  Burdett  and  liberty  meaning  blood  and 
anarchy.”  After  the  defeat  of  his  currency  measures  in 
Parliament,  he  proclaimed  himself  a  radical  reformer,  and 
in  December,  1829,  together  with  fourteen  others,  he 
founded  the  “  Birmingham  Political  Union  for  the  Pro¬ 
tection  of  Public  Rights  ”  and  rendered  yeoman’s  service 
in  the  agitation  for  the  Reform  Bill  of  1832.  He  was  ex¬ 
tremely  popular  among  all  classes,  and,  as  a  politician,  he 
adopted  a  somewhat  modern  method  of  gaining  support  by 
kissing  the  children  and  very  often  bestowing  this  token  of 
recognition  upon  the  mothers  of  the  children.  At  one  elec¬ 
tion  he  was  credited  to  have  kissed  about  eight  thousand 
women.  Among  the  Chartists,  he  belonged  to  the  moral- 
force  group. 

As  the  leader  of  the  Birmingham  Currency  School,  he 
attributed  every  trouble  which  befell  England  to  the  re¬ 
sumption  of  specie-payment  in  1819  and  advocated  the  in¬ 
flation  of  the  currency  by  means  of  paper  money,  whose 
standard  should  be  regulated  in  accordance  with  fluctuating 


121  ] 


THE  LEADERS 


121 


prices-  His  pamphlets  on  monetary  questions  made  him 
widely  known,  although  he  met  with  little  sympathy  in  Par¬ 
liamentary  circles  as  well  as  among  the  radicals.  Disraeli 
described  him  as  a  provincial  banker  laboring  under  a 
financial  monomafiia.  Cobbett  accused  him  of  desiring  to 
keep  up  “  an  army  deadweight,  sinecures,  places  and  pen¬ 
sions,  the  Stock  Exchange  in  full  swing  and  the  infamous 
borough-mongers  in  the  height  of  prosperity.”  O’Connor 
used  to  call  his  financial  schemes  “  rag-botheration.”  An 
official  declaration  of  the  Chartists  referred  to  the  “  cor¬ 
rupting  influence  of  paper  money  ”  as  the  most  “  oppressive 
measure,”  by  which  the  workingmen  were  “  enslaved  ”.x 
Attwood,  however,  never  tired  of  his  agitation  in  favor  of 
paper  currency  and  worked  the  hardest  for  the  People’s 
Charter,  harboring  the  belief  that  an  ideal  monetary  reform 
would  be  enacted  by  a  democratic  Parliament. 

Henry  Hetherington  was  another  man  whose  great  popu¬ 
larity  lent  considerable  support  to  the  moral-force  group 
of  Chartists.  He  was  not  an  orator  of  any  force  or  elo¬ 
quence,  but  enjoyed  an  enviable  reputation  as  the  champion 
and  martyr  of  the  battle  for  an  unstamped  press.  Prisons 
had  no  terrors  for  him,  and  for  a  period  of  five  years  2 
he  published  the  Poor  Man’s  Guardian  in  open  “defiance  of 
law  to  try  the  power  of  right  against  might."  In  1836  his 
Twopenny  Despatch  took  the  lead  in  the  courageous  strug¬ 
gle  for  a  free  and  popular  press.  After  the  formation  of 
the  London  Working  Men’s  Association  he  was  one  of  the 
missionaries  who  were  sent  out  to  organize  similar  bodies 
all  over  the  country.  As  a  Chartist  he  professed  intimate 
sympathy  with  the  principles  and  policies  of  his  friend 
Lovett. 

1  See  Hansard,  vol.  xlix,  1839,  p.  242 ;  cf.  also  Bronterre’s  view, 
supra ,  p.  1 16. 

2  Dec.  25,  1830,  to  Dec.  20,  1835. 


CHAPTER  VIII 


I  am  here  to  blow  to  the  uttermost 
ends  of  the  earth  that  lie — the  impious 
and  blasphemous  lie  of  the  hirelings — 
that  you  are  bound  to  obey  laws  with¬ 
out  knowing  what  they  are.  .  .  .  Noth¬ 
ing  can  be  more  wicked  or  diabolical 
than  that.  Before  you  obey  a  law,  you 
must  know  whether  it  is  good  or  bad. 

— Rev.  I.  R.  Stephens. 

The  Gospel  of  Revolt 

William  Lovett  was  the  apostle  of  Moral  Force.  He 
had  unbounded  faith  in  the  moral  propensities  of  mankind. 
Since  ignorance  alone  was  at  the  root  of  all  oppression,  it 
was  necessary  only  to  awaken  the  dormant  faculties  of  mind 
in  order  to  assure  the  blissful  regeneration  of  society.  It 
was  natural,  then,  that  he  should  inspire  the  London  Work¬ 
ing  Men's  Association  not  to  “  rely  on  the  mere  excitation 
of  the  multitude  to  condemn  bad  men  or  measures,  or  to 
change  one  despot  for  another.”  No  force  other  than  moral 
suasion,  backed  by  political  and  social  education,  would 
enable  the  people  “  to  found  their  institutions  on  principles 
of  equality,  truth,  and  justice.”  1 

O'Connor  and  Bronterre  made  no  religion  of  Moral 
Force.  They  advocated  “ Peace  and  Order”  not  as  a  maxim, 
but  as  a  policy.  When  the  temper  of  the  people  dic¬ 
tated  a  different  policy,  they  did  not  contradict  it, — they 

1  See  “Address  to  the  Working  Classes  of  Europe,  and  especially  to 
the  Polish  People,”  in  Life  and  Struggles  of  William  Lovett,  pp.  150- 
158. 


122 


[122 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


123 


123] 

did  not  even  apologize, — they  simply  yielded  to  the  in¬ 
evitable.  Physical  Force  as  a  philosophy  and  Revolt  as  an 
apotheosis  of  justice  were  broached  by  a  different  set  of 
men  who  exerted  a  dominant  influence  on  the  masses  during 
the  first  period  of  the  movement. 

Joseph  Raynor  Stephens ,  the  apostle  of  revolt  and  the 
only  Chartist  who  at  one  time  vied  with  O’Connor  in  popu¬ 
larity,  was  born  on  the  18th  of  March,  1805,  at  Edinburgh, 
where  his  father  was  a  Methodist  preacher.  He  made  the 
best  of  his  elementary  education  when  yet  quite  young. 
After  teaching  school  for  two  years,  he  became  a  Methodist 
preacher  in  1825,  and  the  following  year  was  appointed  to 
a  mission  station  at  Stockholm,  Sweden.  In  1829  he  was 
ordained  as  a  Wesleyan  minister  and  in  1830  was  stationed 
at  Cheltenham.  His  Wesleyan  career  ended  in  1834,  when 
he  was  dismissed  for  his  association  with  Richard  Oastler 
in  the  agitation  for  the  improvement  of  the  condition  of 
factory  laborers.  The  dismissal  from  the  ministry  raised 
him  in  the  estimation  of  the  working  men.  But  it  was  his 
subsequent  scathing  attacks  on  the  New  Poor  Law  that 
endeared  him  to  the  masses  who  before  long  erected  for 
him  three  chapels  in  the  Ashton  district.  Besides  his  regu¬ 
lar  sermons  in  the  chapels,  he  made  use  of  the  public  market 
to  harangue  big  crowds  and  to>  teach  them  not  to  “  care  for 
an  Act  of  Parliament  ”,  as  it  was  only  “  waste  paper  ”, 
“  treason  ”,  and  “  blasphemy  ”,  unless  it  tended  to  promote 
happiness  among  men.  He  was  never  shy  in  the  choice  of 
his  epithets  against  the  ruling  classes,  and  it  was  for  this 
that  Francis  Place  characterized  him  as  a  “  malignant, 
crazy  man  who  never  seemed  exhausted  with  bawling 
atrocious  matter." 

Stephens  did  not  consider  himself  a  radical,  but,  as  “  a 
revolutionist  by  fire,  a  revolutionist  by  blood,  to  the  knife, 


124 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[124 

to  the  death,”  be  joined  the  ranks  of  the  Chartists,  pro¬ 
claiming  the  question  of  universal  suffrage  to  be,  after  all, 
“  a  knife  and  fork  question.”  1  He  was  recognized  as  the 
greatest  Chartist  orator.  A  master  on  the  platform,  he  pos¬ 
sessed  personal  magnetism,  felicity  of  expression  and  a 
singular  style  of  oratory  which,  at  his  best,  made  him 
irresistible.  Vehement  inflammatory  declamations  inter¬ 
woven  with  passages  of  classical  beauty  ;  rugged  expressions 
of  protest  mingled  with  sentiments  of  love  and  devotion; 
scenes  of  revolting  despondency  redeemed  by  prophetic  pro¬ 
mises  of  a  happy  life;  curses  sputtered  in  a  voice  that  could 
be  distinctly  heard  by  twenty  thousand  persons  in  the  open 
air  soothed  by  intonations  of  musical  cadence;  stories  of 
every-day  life,  so  near  and  familiar,  followed  by  strange 
but  exalted  citations  from  the  Bible, — all  this  rendered  his 
spell  the  more  dominant  because  of  the  spectacular  effect 
produced  by  the  black  robe  of  a  minister  of  the  gospel.  His 
sermons  were  partly  religious  and  partly  political,  but  in 
all  he  exposed  the  crying  injustice  of  the  economic  system. 
His  pictures  of  women  bleeding  to  death  from  overwork  in 
factories,  of  children  in  mortal  terror  of  the  workhouse,  of 
old  men  and  old  women  dying  from  starvation,  produced 
a  lurid  effect  on  the  minds  of  his  hearers  and  made  them  the 
more  susceptible  to  his  subtle  allusions  to  force.  He  made 
extensive  use  of  the  gospel  to  popularize  his  philosophy  of 
social  justice.  He  preached  class  consciousness  and  or¬ 
ganization  as  he  preached  religion.  He  urged  insurrection 
as  he  extolled  the  names  of  the  Prophets.  He  inspired 
courage  in  emulation  of  Christ : 

Oh,  my  brethren,  look  neither  to  this  man  nor  to  that  man,  but 
pray  to  God  Almighty  to  raise  up  among  you  prophets  like 
unto  Moses  and  Joshua  and  Hezekiah  and  Ezekiel  and  Mala- 


1  See  Annual  Register,  vol.  lxxx,  1839,  P-  311- 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


125 


125] 

chi,  and  Amos  and  Jonah;  pray  to  God  to  raise  up  apostles 
like  Peter  and  Paul  and  John;  pray  God  to  raise  up  men  filled 
with  his  favor;  men  whose  hearts  are  filled  with  love  to  their 
brethren;  pray  God  to  send  such  men  out,  with  their  lives  in 
their  hands,  to  launch  his  thunderbolts  at  the  head  of  the  op¬ 
pressor,  and  to  shed  his  blessing  upon  the  heads  of  those  who 
in  obedience,  reverential,  child-like  obedience,  love  to  follow 
in  the  way  of  his  commandments. 

You  will  never  have  freedom  or  happiness  in  England;  this 
land  will  never  be  worth  living  in — it  is  not  worth  living  in 
now,  if  it  were  not  for  the  hope  in  God  that  it  may  be  better ; 
if  there  be  a  hell  upon  earth  comparatively  with  other  nations 
of  the  world,  it  is  England;  if  the  devil  has  any  seat  of  au¬ 
thority — any  kingdom  where  he  rules  more  infernally  than  in 
any  other  part  of  the  world,  it  is  England  at  this  moment. 
Look  where  you  will ;  cast  your  eyes  abroad  from  the  political 
head  to  the  political  foot,  there  is  no  soundness  in  us ;  there  is 
nothing  “  but  wounds  and  bruises,  and  putrifying  sores,”  and 
the  only  balm  of  Gilead,  the  only  good  physician  is  yonder 
Good  Physician — he  who  laid  down  his  life  for  the  world. 
Pray,  then,  for  the  spirit  of  God  to  be  poured  out ;  pray  for  the 
spirit  of  God  to  come  down ;  pray  for  the  spirit  of  determined 

s 

and  decided  men  once  more  to  be  imparted  .  .  .  ;  pray  that 
God  would  fill  you  with  his  truth,  that  he  would  raise  you  up 
and  carry  you  far  beyond  the  fear  of  man;  and  when  your 
own  soul  is  let  loose,  when  your  own  mind  is  free,  when  your 
own  heart  is  big  and  swollen,  and  entirely  filled  with  the  fear 
of  God,  you  will  never  be  afraid  of  what  men  can  say  or  do 
unto  you.  You  will  say,  “  He  that  is  for  me,  is  greater  than 
all  that  are  against  me  ” ;  and  you  will  go  on  in  the  name,  and 
in  the  strength  of  God,  and  you  will  be  a  Christian  Reformer. 
We  want  in  England  Christian  Reformers.1 

Resistance  to  bad  laws  is,  according  to  Stephens,  as 

1  A  Sermon  Preached  at  Hyde,  in  Lancashire,  on  the  17th  of  Feb¬ 
ruary,  1839. 


126 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[126 

exalted  a  virtue  as  is  obedience  to  good  laws.  Allegiance 
per  se  is  not  an  end;  if  the  law  affords  no  protection,  it 
.  must  be  disobeyed.  His  appeal  for  rebellion  was  direct : 

Are  the  Spitalfields  weavers  protected,  when  not  one  in  a  hun¬ 
dred  of  them,  after  working  twelve  hours  a  day,  can  earn  12s. 
a  week?  Are  the  handloom  weavers  of  the  north  protected, 
when  they  cannot,  with  all  their  toil,  earn  more  than  7s.  a  week  ? 
I  have  known  girls  eight  years  of  age  working  at  the  anvil,  mak¬ 
ing  nails  from  six  in  the  morning  until  eight  or  nine  at  night, 
and  on  Friday  all  night  long,  and,  after  all,  could  not  earn 
more  than  is.  6d.  per  week.  The  mother  worked  equal  time, 
and  whilst  she  was  at  work,  one  of  her  children  was  burnt 
almost  to  a  cinder,  and  she  could  only  earn  3s.  a  week,  whilst 
the  grandmother  could  get  no  more  than  is.  6d.  Do  those 
poor  creatures  owe  allegiance  to  the  laws?  Are  they  pro¬ 
tected?  Do  the  poor  wretches  of  the  factories — the  carders, 
the  piecers,  the  scavengers,  dressers,  weavers,  and  spinners 
— do  they  owe  allegiance  to  the  laws?  Does  the  agricultural 
laborer,  who  can  only  earn  8s.  a  week,  owe  submission  to  the 
laws?  The  law,  in  establishing  oppression,  makes  the  op¬ 
pressed  its  deadly  enemy.1 

Stephens  dwelt  little  on  the  political  aspects  of  the  Char¬ 
ter.  He  aimed  chiefly  to  impress  the  masses  with  the 
!/  realization  of  the  iniquitous  economic  and  social  system. 
“  You  see  yonder  factory  with  its  towering  chimney.  Every 
brick  in  that  factory  is  cemented  with  the  blood  of  women 
and  little  children  ”, — he  said  on  one  occasion.  He  always 
warned  his  hearers  against  passiveness.  On  January  1, 
1838,  referring  to  the  New  Poor  Law,  he  admonished  a 
Newcastle  audience  that  “  sooner  than  wife  and  husband, 
and  father  and  son,  should  be  sundered  and  dungeoned,  and 

1  A  Sermon  Preached  in  Shepherd  and  Shepherdess  Fields}  London, 
on  Sunday,  May  12,  1839. 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


12J 


127] 

fed  on  ‘  skillee  —  sooner  th^n  wife  or  daughter  should 
wear  the  prison  dress — sooner  than  that — Newcastle  ought 
to  be,  and  should  be — one  blaze  of  fire,  with  only  one  way 
to  put  it  out,  and  that  with  the  blood  of  all  who  supported 
this  abominable  measure.”  He  recurred  to  this  theme  in 
most  of  his  sermons,  and  once  he  declared  tersely : 

I  have  never  acknowledged  the  authority  of  the  New  Poor  Law, 
and  so  help  me  God  I  never  will.  I  never  paid  my  rates  under 
it,  and  so  help  me  God  I  never  will — they  may  take  every  chair, 
every  table  and  every  bed  I  have — they  may  pull  my  house 
over  my  head,  and  send  me  and  my  wife  and  my  child  wander¬ 
ers  on  the  heaths  and  the  hills — they  may  take  all  but  my  wife, 
my  child,  and  my  life,  but  pay  one  penny  I  never  will.  If 
they  dare  attempt  to  take  them,  and  it  becomes  necessary  to 
repel  force  by  force,  there  will  be  a  knife,  a  pike,  or  a  bullet 
at  hand,  and  if  I  am  to  fall,  I  will  at  least  sell  life  for  life. 
I  exhort  you  and  all  others  to  do  the  same.  I  do  not  mean 
to  flinch.  I  will  recommend  nothing  which  I  will  not  do.  I 
tell  you  that  if  they  attempt  to  carry  into  effect  this  damnable 
law ,  I  mean  to  fight.  I  will  lay  aside  the  black  coat  for  the 
red,  and  with  the  Bible  in  one  hand  and  a  sword  in  the  other — 
a  sword  of  steel,  not  of  argument — I  will  fight  to  the  death 
sooner  than  that  law  shall  be  brought  into  operation  on  me 

or  on  others  with  my  consent  or  through  my  silence . 

Perish  trade  and  manufacture  —  perish  arts,  literature  and 
science — perish  palace,  throne  and  altar — if  they  can  only  stand 
upon  the  dissolution  of  the  marriage  tie — the  annihilation  of 
every  domestic  affection,  and  the  vilest  and  most  brutal  oppres¬ 
sion  ever  yet  practiced  upon  the  poor  of  any  country  in  the 
world.1 

The  most  salient  feature  in  his  sermons,  besides  their 
inciting  character,  was  the  subjection  of  politics  to  eco- 

1  A  Sermon  Preached  at  Primrose  Hill ,  London ,  on  Sunday,  May  12 , 
1839 • 


128 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[128 

nomic  ends.  Contrary  to  well-nigh  all  Chartists,  he  never 
made  universal  suffrage  synonymous  with  universal  happi¬ 
ness .  He  believed  that  every  man  without  a  home,  or  whose 
home  was  “  not  all  that  God  meant  it  to  be,”  was  robbed 
and  had,  therefore,  “  a  just  cause  for  quarrel  with  society.”  1 
He  gave  his  allegiance  to  the  People’s  Charter  in  so  far  as  it 
aimed  to  assure  a  happy  home  for  every  man  “  that  breathed 
God’s  free  air  or  trod  God’s  free  earth.”  But  at  the  same 
time  he  realized,  and  endeavored  to  make  the  people  realize 
that  the  Charter  would  be  of  no  avail  without  a  strong, 
organized,  revolutionary  movement  for  the  purpose  of  ef¬ 
fecting  a  complete  change  in  the  economic  system : 

There  has  already  been  too  much  of  what  is  called  political 
reform,  the  juggling  of  the  places  from  one  to  another,  the 
passing  of  the  pea  from  one  cup  to  another  cup  to  amuse  and 
to  deceive,  and  ultimately  to  destroy  the  people;  and  every 
step  you  take  is  a  step  nearer  to  hell.  All  the  laws  in  England 
could  not  make  Hyde  one  bit  the  better  unless  the  people  were 
a  changed  people.  An  Act  of  Parliament  cannot  change  the 
hearts  of  the  tyrants  Ashton  and  Howard.  These  men  have 
made  themselves  rich  by  making  you  poor.  They  have  swollen 
with  wealth  by  plundering  you.  Now,  all  the  laws  in  England 
could  not  change  the  hearts  of  those  wicked  men ;  and  unless 
their  hearts  were  changed,  and  your  hearts  were  changed, 
what  could  the  law  do?  There  would  be  a  thousand  ways  of 
breaking  through  it;  a  thousand  ways  of  avoiding  it  and  of 
screening  those  who  were  detected,  even  after  they  had  broken 
the  law.  It  could  do  no  good.  Your  minds  must  be  made 
up.  You,  husbands!  unless  your  minds  be  made  up  that  your 
wives  ought  not  and  shall  not  work ;  that  rather  than  kill 
your  wives  by  allowing  them  to  work,  you  will  allow  God  to 
take  their  lives  by  gradual  starvation.  .  .  .  But  God  Almighty 

1  A  Sermon  Preached  in  Shepherd  and  Shepherdess  Fields ,  London , 
on  Sunday ,  May  12,  1839. 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


129 


129] 

is  moving  the  working  classes  in  the  country,  and  therefore  I 
exhort  you  to  give  yourself  to  prayer.  Pray  God  to  sound 
the  alarm  from  one  end  of  the  land  to  the  other;  and  then,  in 
the  spirit  of  self-denial,  and  self-sacrifice,  and  devotion,  be 
united  as  the  heart  of  one  man,  and  as  one  united  and  in¬ 
dissoluble  phalanx,  God  leading  you  by  a  pillar  of  fire  by 
night,  and  by  a  pillar  of  cloud  by  day,  wend  your  way  and 
force  your  passage  through  the  wilderness  of  the  promised 
land — the  land  that  flows  with  milk  and  honey.  It  is  high 
time  there  was  some  mighty  movement.1 

The  emphasis  which  Stephens  always  laid  on  the  economic 
aspects  of  the  movement,  not  less  than  his  advocacy  of 
physical  force,  precluded  Lovett  and  his  friends  from  re¬ 
cognizing  him  as  a  bona  fide  Chartist.  In  an  Address  to 
the  Irish  People ,  published  in  August,  1838,  in  reply  to 
the  Precursors,  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association 
disclaimed  all  affiliation  with  Stephens,  who  was  labeled  as 
a  man  “  more  known  for  his  opposition  to  the  New  Poor 
Law  than  for  his  advocacy  of  Radicalism  ”,  and  who  “  ridi¬ 
culed  our  principles  and  publicly  declared  his  want  of  con¬ 
fidence  in  us.”  2  His  sermons  support  the  suspicion  that  in 
his  heart  of  hearts  he  probably  never  believed  in  the  efficacy 
of  political  agitation.  It  may  have  been  the  vanity  of  a 
popular  idol  and  the  fear  of  losing  his  grip  on  the  people 
that  restrained  him  from  speaking  his  mind;  he  may  have 
felt  reluctant  to  disillusion  the  masses  in  their  faith  in  the 
talismanic  power  of  the  Charter;  he  may  have  himself  been 
unconsciously  caught  in  the  maelstrom  of  universal  agita¬ 
tion,  or  he  may  have  cast  his  lot  with  the  Chartists  simply 
because  the  new  movement  afforded  a  wide  field  for  the 
dissemination  of  his  revolutionary  ideas.  At  any  rate,  his 

1  A  Sermon  Preached  at  Hyde,  in  Lancashire,  on  the  17th  of  Feb¬ 
ruary,  1839. 

’  William  Lovett,  Life  and  Struggles,  p.  195. 


130 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[13° 


skepticism  became  the  more  pronounced  the  sterner  the  gov¬ 
ernment  became  in  its  hostility  towards  the  movement.  In 
a  sermon  preached  at  Ashton  on  May  26th,  1839,  he  warned 
the  people  of  the  futility  of  abortive  demonstrations  and 
desultory  fighting  and  advised  them  to  divide  themselves  into 
little  bands  of  five  or  ten  in  a  company  and  to  meet  at  each 
other's  houses,  and  “  there  over  the  hearthstone,  without 
books  and  papers,  without  speeches  and  resolutions,  with¬ 
out  anything  but  talking  and  praying,  tell  one  another  what 
they  think,  and  ask  one  another  whether  they  are  right,  and 
whether  their  minds  are  made  up  to  shed  the  last  drop  of 
blood  rather  than  live  in  bondage,  and  sell  their  wives  and 
children  to  the  devil.”  And  then  in  an  ebullition  of  in¬ 
dignation,  he  cried  out : 


Down  with  the  House  of  Commons ;  down  with  the  House  of 
Lords;  aye,  down  with  the  throne,  and  down  with  the  altar 
itself;  burn  the  church;  down  with  all  rank,  all  dignity,  all 
title,  all  power;  unless  that  dignity,  authority,  and  power  will 

Jand  do  secure  to  the  honest  industrious  efforts  of  the  upright 
and  poor  man  a  comfortable  maintenance  in  exchange  for 
his  labor.  I  don't  care  about  your  Charter;  it  may  be  all  very 
right;  it  may  be  all  very  good;  you  have  a  right  to  get  it, 
mind  you,  and  I  will  stand  by  you  in  it ;  but  I  don’t  care  about 
it;  and  I  don’t  care  about  a  republic.  You  have  a  right  to 
have  it  if  you  choose;  and  I  will  stand  by  you,  in  defending 
your  right  to  have  it  if  you  choose.  I  don’t  care  about  a 
monarchy;  I  don’t  care  about  the  present,  or  any  other  order 
of  things,  unless  the  Charter,  the  republic,  the  monarchy,  the 
present  order  of  things,  or  any  other  order  of  things  that  may 
be  brought  to  succeed  the  present,  should,  first  of  all,  and 
above  all,  and  through  all,  secure  to  every  son  of  the  soil,  to 
every  living  being  of  the  human  kind  ....  a  full,  a  suffi¬ 
cient  and  a  comfortable  maintenance,  according  to  the  will 
and  commandment  of  God.  That  is  what  I  go  for;  that  is 
what  I  talk  for;  that  is  what  I  live  for;  and  that  is  what 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


I3I] 


131 


I  will  die  for;  for  I  will  have  it.  I  say  now  what  I  said 
before ;  the  earth  is  the  Lord’s,  and  the  fullness  thereof ;  the 
cattle  upon  a  thousand  hills;  the  gold  and  the  silver;  and  he 
has  filled  all  things  with  plenteousness.  There  is  nothing  nig¬ 
gardly  from  God.  There  has  nothing  come  in  stinging,  close- 
fisted  niggardliness  from  God  Almighty.  It  is  all  plenty. 
There  is  plenty  of  soil — there  is  plenty  of  water — there  is 
plenty  of  sun — there  is  plenty  of  rain — there  is  plenty  of  dew 
— the  winter  throws  a  warm  blanket  of  driven  snow  upon 
the  earth,  to  cover  it  and  keep  it  warm :  then  He  sends  out 
the  sun  to  rule  the  day — refreshing  and  reviving  is  the  breeze. 
.  .  .  What  have  we  to  thank  God  for?  What  have  we  to 
bless  God  for?  Does  God  call  upon  us  to  thank  Him  for 
nothing?  Then  what  kind  of  a  God  is  He?  And  what  sort 
of  worshippers  does  He  take  us  to  be?  Does  He  call  upon 
us  to  bless  Him  for  curses?  Then  what  kind  of  a  Maker, 
Preserver,  and  Redeemer,  and  Judge,  is  He;  and  what  kind  of 
workmanship  of  his  Almighty  hand  are  we?  No,  my  brethren, 
the  very  thought  of  such  a  thing  is  impiety  and  blasphemy; 
God  does  not  ask  us  to  thank  Him  for  nothing;  or  to  bless 
Him  for  curses.  Then  what  have  we  to  thank  and  bless  God 
for?  You  have  to  thank  and  bless  God  for  houses  and  for 
lands,  for  food  and  for  clothing,  which  He  has  given  you, 
but  which  others  have  taken  from  you.  ...  I  thank  God, 
who  gave  me  life  and  breath,  and  all  things  richly  to  enjoy. 
And  if  any  man  asks  me  where  they  are,  as  a  laboring  man, 
I  answer,  “  God  gave  them,  but  wicked  men  have  taken  them 
from  me.”  But  I  not  only  thank  God  for  having  given 
them  to  me ;  I  not  only  bless  God  for  having  bestowed  them 
upon  me,  but  I  trust  in  God  for  strength  to  help  me  to  take 
them  back  again.  I  am  alive,  and  therefore,  I  thank  God,  I 
have  the  use  of  my  understanding,  and  the  understanding 
shows  me  not  only  what  things  are,  but  what  things  ought  to 
be — and  I  trust  that  God,  who  gave  me  life,  and  who  still  lends 
me  breath,  and  intrusts  me  with  power  of  body  as  well  as 
power  of  mind — I  trust  in  that  God,  and  I  pray  to  that  God, 
that  he  would,  if  it  be  found  that  my  rights  cannot  be  got  back 


I32 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[132 


without  it,  and  by  any  way  short  of  it,  “  I  pray  God  literally 
to  teach  my  hands  to  war,  and  my  fingers  to  fight.”  ....  I 
preach  a  startling  truth ;  I  preach  a  sweeping  truth ;  I  preach  the 
truth,  which  will,  if  they  choose  to  suffer  it,  set  things  right, 
without  hurting  any  body.  If  they  will  not  suffer  the  truth — 
if  they  will  neither  have  it,  nor  forbear  from  hindering  it, 
then  I  preach  a  truth  which  will  be  the  means,  I  hope,  of 
destroying  them  root  and  branch.  It  is  time  the  prisoners 
were  let  loose ;  it  is  time  the  dungeon  was  broken  open ;  it  is 
time  the  Bastile  was  burnt  down ;  it  is  time  that  every  working¬ 
man  in  England  had  the  means,  and  there  are  the  means,  and 
they  are  not  far  off  him,  and  the  Government  is  beginning  to 
find  it  out,  and  is  arming  the  pensioners ;  but,  unluckily  for 
the  devils  who  arm  the  pensioners,  the  pensioners  are  training 
the  people.  .  .  .  You  have  a  right,  every  working  man  amongst 
you  has  the  right  to  as  much  for  your  labor  as  will  keep 
you  and  your  families.1 


For  some  time  the  idol  of  the  masses,  Stephens,  however, 
lost  his  influence  as  soon  as  his  criticism  of  the  Chartist 
demands  became  pronounced.  It  was  his  heresy  in  politics 
that  drove  him  to  the  Chartists  and  it  was  the  same  heresy 
that  barred  him  from  their  ranks.  The  chief  protagonist 
and  pillar  of  insurrectionism,  he  was  the  first  to  be  singled 
out  for  persecution  by  the  government  and  to  be  denounced 
by  the  leaders  of  the  movement.  The  cult  of  physical  force, 
however,  always  had  more  than  one  high  priest. 


George  Julian  Harney,  unlike  Stephens,  devoted  his 
ubiquitous  activity  to  the  exclusive  agitation  for  the  Charter. 
He  was  but  twenty  years  of  age  when  he  plunged  into  the 
tempestuous  sea  of  the  Chartist  movement.  He  came  with 
a  halo  of  martyrdom,  having  suffered  imprisonment,  when 
yet  quite  a  boy,  for  selling  unstamped  literature.  Brought  up 

1  The  London  Democrat,  June  8,  1839. 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


133 


133] 

under  extremely  adverse  circumstances,  he  cultivated  a 
feeling  of  antagonism  towards  the  powers  that  be.  He 
could  not  boast  of  a  thorough  education,  but  he  possessed 
great  natural  abilities.  He  was  the  man  who  better  than  any 
other  of  the  Chartist  leaders  could  in  time  read  the  hand¬ 
writing  on  the  wall,  displaying  a  deep  understanding  of  the 
social  fabric  and  a  keen  insight  into  the  role  which  the  work¬ 
ing  class  was  destined  to  play.  In  many  of  his  writings,  he 
foreshadowed  the  subsequent  principles  of  scientific  Social¬ 
ism.  At  the  beginning  of  his  career,  however,  he  was  the 
most  violent  agitator  of  physical  force.  He  was  the  secre¬ 
tary  of  the  “  London  Democratic  Association  ”  and,  at  the 
age  of  twenty-two,  was  the  chief  writer  for  The  London 
Democrat  which  was  started  on  the  13th  of  April,  1839,  to 
preach  the  gospel  of  insurrection.  Assuming  the  name  of 
Friend  of  the  People ,  he  hailed  the  spirit  of  Marat  with  a 
courage  which  only  youth  could  inspire: 

Hail !  spirit  of  Marat !  Hail !  glorious  apostle  of  Equality ! ! 
Hail !  immortal  martyr  of  Liberty ! ! !  All  Hail !  thou  whose 
imperishable  title  I  have  assumed ;  and  oh !  may  the  God  of 
Freedom  strengthen  me  to  brave,  like  thee,  the  persecution  of 
tyrants  and  traitors,  or  (if  so  doomed)  to  meet,  like  thee,  a 
martyr’s  death !  1 

His  style,  not  refined  as  that  of  Bronterre  nor  as  florid  as 
that  of  O’Connor,  was  more  poignant  than  that  of  either  of 
them.  His  exhortation  to  revolt  was  direct.  Stephens 
suggested  that  “  Englishmen  have  the  right  not  only  to  have 
arms,  but  to  take  them  up  in  defence  of  their  lives,  their 
wives  and  children,  for  their  homes  and  their  hearths.”  2 
Harney  made  it  his  “  arduous  task  ”  to  urge  war  with 
traitors,  “  war  to  the  knife.”  In  his  paper  he  printed 

1  The  London  Democrat,  April  13,  1839. 

5  A  Sermon  Preached  at  Primrose  Hill,  on  Sunday,  May  12,  1839. 


134 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[134 

“  Scenes  and  Sketches  from  the  French  Revolution,”  depict¬ 
ing  events  and  leaders  of  the  movement,  “  in  order  that  the 
present  generation  may  derive  a  lesson  from  the  deeds  of 
the  past,”  learn  to  avoid  the  errors,  and,  in  the  revolution 
“  which  will  speedily  take  place  ”  in  England,  “  imitate  the 
heroic,  God-like  deeds  of  the  sons  of  republican  France.” 
He  called  upon  the  poor  and  oppressed,  the  young  and  the 
brave,  “  to  strike  the  home  blow,  the  final  blow,  the  death 
blow  for  old  England  and  Freedom,”  and  assuring  them 
that  no  army  could  withstand  a  million  of  armed  men,  he 
exhorted  the  workingmen  to  be  armed  and  prepared  to 
exercise  their  “  first  and  holiest  right, — the  sacred  right 
of  insurrection  ”  : 

Men  of  the  East  and  West,  men  of  the  North  and  South, 
your  success  lies  with  yourselves,  depend  upon  yourselves  alone, 
and  your  cause  will  be  triumphant  .  .  .  Prepare !  Prepare ! ! 
Prepare ! ! !  Listen  not  to  the  men  who  would  preach  delay. 
The  man  who  would  now  procrastinate  is  a  traitor,  and  may 
your  vengeance  light  upon  his  head.  .  .  .  Let  me  exhort  you  to 
arm.  .  .  .  Arm  to  protect  your  aged  parents,  arm  for  your 
wives  and  children,  arm  for  your  sweethearts  and  sisters, 
arm  to  drive  tyranny  from  the  soil  and  oppression  from  the 
judgment-seat.  Your  country,  your  posterity,  your  God  de¬ 
mands  of  you  to  arm!  Arm!!  Arm!!!  .  .  .  Come,  then, 
men  of  the  North,  from  your  snow-capped  hills;  come,  then, 
men  of  the  South,  from  your  sunlit  valleys ;  come  to  the  gather¬ 
ing;  unite,  fraternize,  arm,  and  you  will  be  free.1 

As  a  speaker,  Harney  was  far  below  the  mark.  But  he 
always  had  a  sufficient  stock  of  “  strong  words  ”,  which 
were  in  great  demand  by  the  masses,  and  his  role  was  more 
of  an  agitator  than  of  a  leader.2 

1  The  London  Democrat ,  April  20,  1839. 

2  Cf.  R.  G.  Gammage,  History  of  the  Chartist  Movement ,  Newcastle- 
on-Tyne  and  London,  1894,  PP-  29-30. 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


135 


135] 

Henry  Vincent,  “  the  English  Demosthenes  ”,  was  an¬ 
other  man  who  helped  blow  the  embers  of  popular  dis¬ 
content  into  a  consuming  flame  of  revolt.  The  son  of  a 
poor  silver-smith,  he  was  compelled  to  earn  his  livelihood 
at  the  age  of  eleven.  Unable  to  give  him  a  good  education, 
his  father  inculcated  in  him,  however,  a  love  for  freedom 
and  justice.  Vincent  became  interested  in  politics  in  1828, 
when  he  was  but  fifteen  years  of  age.  He  was  subsequently 
an  active  member  of  the  Political  Unions  at  Hull  and  Lon¬ 
don  and  was  one  of  the  members  who  were  deputed  by  the 
London  Working  Men’s  Association  to  agitate  for  the 
Charter.  He  was  a  popular  orator  of  great  skill  and  he 
used  his  talents  to  rouse  the  passions  of  the  people.  Judg¬ 
ing  by  the  portrait  drawn  of  him  by  one  of  the  Chartists, 
he  was  the  most  graceful  and  winning  orator  on  the  Char¬ 
tist  side: 

With  a  fine  mellow  flexible  voice,  a  florid  complexion,  and 
excepting  in  intervals  of  passion,  a  most  winning  expression, 
he  had  only  to  present  himself  in  order  to  win  all  hearts  over 
to  his  side.  His  attitude  was  perhaps  the  most  easy  and 
graceful  of  any  popular  orator  of  the  time.  For  fluency  of 
speech  he  rivaled  all  his  contemporaries,  few  of  whom  were 
anxious  to  stand  beside  him  on  the  platform.  His  rare  power 
of  imitation  irresistibly  drew  peals  of  laughter  from  the  gravest 
audience.  His  versatility,  which  enabled  him  to  change  from 
the  grave  to  the  gay  and  vice  versa,  and  to  assume  a  dozen 
various  characters  in  almost  as  many  minutes,  was  one  of  the 
secrets  of  his  success.  With  the  fair  sex,  his  slight  hand¬ 
some  figure,  the  merry  twinkle  of  his  eye,  his  incomparable 
mimicry,  his  passionate  bursts  of  enthusiasm,  the  rich  music 
of  his  voice,  and  above  all,  his  appeals  for  the  elevation  of 
woman,  rendered  him  a  universal  favorite.1 


1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  11. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


While  the  list  of  the  leaders  and  agitators  during  the  first 
stages  of  the  movement  is  by  no  means  complete,  special 
mention  must  be  made  of  John  Frost ,  the  “  martyr  magis¬ 
trate  ”,  who  ventured  to  carry  the  propaganda  of  revolt 
into  practice  and  who  subsequently  won  the  hearts  of  all 
liberty-seeking  people. 

The  son  of  humble  parents,  Frost  was  born  on  the  25th 
of  May,  1786,  at  Newport.  In  his  boyhood,  he  displayed 
great  abilities.  His  early  education,  however,  was  quite 
limited,  as  he  lost  his  father  while  he  was  yet  in  cradle  and 
was  brought  up  by  his  grandfather,  a  boot  and  shoe  maker, 
who  cherished  the  hope  of  making  his  grandson  useful  in  his 
business.  After  sending  him  to  school  in  Bristol  for  a  few 
years,  he  indentured  John  to  his  business.  The  boy  was 
released,  however,  through  the  interference  of  an  uncle,  and. 
at  the  age  of  sixteen,  was  apprenticed  to  a  tailor.  Later 
he  became  an  assistant  to  a  woolen  draper  in  Bristol.  At 
the  age  of  twenty,  he  went  to  London,  where  he  worked 
at  the  latter  trade.  At  the  solicitations  of  his  mother,  he 
returned  to  Newport  and  established  himself  as  a  draper 
and  tailor.  In  1822  a  certain  Mr.  Protheroe,  an  influential 
politician  of  Newport,  sued  Frost’s  uncle  for  an  alleged 
debt  of  £150.  The  suit  was  decided  in  favor  of  Protheroe. 
As  bail  for  his  uncle,  Frost  threatened  to  expose  Protheroe 
unless  his  loss  were  refunded  to  him.  This  threat  was 
construed  by  the  court  as  an  attempt  at  extortion,  and  to 
avoid  the  payment  of  £1000  damages  awarded  against  him, 
Frost  sold  his  whole  stock,  paid  all  his  creditors,  with  the 
exception  of  one  relative  who  had  him  arrested  for  a  debt 
of  £200.  He  then  surrendered  himself  as  insolvent.  In 
the  meantime,  an  action  for  libel  was  brought  against  him 
on  the  ground  that  he  had  alluded  to  the  jury  as  having  been 
*  packed  ’  and  to  the  witnesses  as  perjurers.  For  this,  he 
paid  the  penalty  of  six  months’  confinement  in  Goldbath 


THE  GOSPEL  OF  REVOLT 


13  7 


i37] 

Fields  Prison  at  London.  Popular  opinion  was,  however, 
in  favor  of  Frost.  After  his  release  from  prison,  he  was 
met  on  the  road,  three  miles  out  of  Newport,  by  about 
fifteen  thousand  persons  with  flags  and  bands  of  music.  He 
was  drawn  in  the  carriage  by  his  townspeople  until  they 
reached  the  bridge,  when  he  was  taken  out,  placed  in  a 
chair  and  carried  on  men’s  shoulders  in  triumph  around 
town. 

In  his  youth,  while  in  London,  Frost  used  to  attend  meet¬ 
ings  of  political  clubs  at  which  the  writings  of  Thomas 
Paine  and  other  radicals  were  discussed.  It  was  then  that 
he  became  imbued  with  radical  ideas  which  he  cherished  all 
his  life.  An  avowed  adherent  of  Cobbett,  he  entered  the 
political  arena  of  his  native  town  in  1817.  He  was  an  in¬ 
defatigable  advocate  of  universal  suffrage  long  before  the 
Charter  was  formulated  by  the  London  Working  Men’s 
Association.  In  recognition  of  his  work  for  municipal  re¬ 
form,  he  was  elected  in  1831  to  the  town  council  of  New¬ 
port.  In  1836,  he  was  appointed  by  the  Secretary  of  State 
to  the  position  of  borough  magistrate.  At  the  same  time 
he  was  also  a  Poor  Law  Guardian.  In  1837,  he  was  elected 
mayor  of  Newport.  In  all  these  offices,  Frost  distinguished 
himself  for  his  ability,  efficiency,  and  justice.  As  Poor 
Law  Guardian,  he  exerted  all  his  powers  to  counteract  the 
cruelties  of  the  law.  He  joined  the  Newport  Working 
Men’s  Association  in  1838  and  took  an  active  part  in  the 
proceedings  and  plans  of  the  organization.  The  miners, 
colliers  and  iron  workers  were  proud  of  their  friend,  the 
magistrate,  and  accorded  him  all  the  honors  of  a  leader. 

In  his  relations  with  people,  Frost  was  always  liked  for 
his  kind  disposition,  mild  manners  and  benevolence.  Yet 
it  was  not  for  these  personal  attributes  that  he  won  the 
affection  of  the  masses.  His  Chartist  career,  however, 
forming  as  it  does  an  integral  part  of  the  history  of  the 
movement,  must  be  deferred  to  a  later  chapter. 


CHAPTER  IX 


The  people’s  voice  is  heard  around, 

And  martyr’s  blood  cries  from  the  ground; 
Demanding  justice  for  the  brave, 

And  freedom  for  the  British  slave. 

On!  on  ye  sons  of  dear-bought  fame, 

Your  long-lost  rights  you  must  regain. 

Make  tyrants  crouch,  and  traitors  see 
That  Britain’s  sons  shall  yet  be  free. 

— William  Aitken. 

The  People 

The  first  period  of  the  Chartist  movement  was  marked 
by  a  state  of  ominous  excitement  in  all  parts  of  the  coun¬ 
try.  The  agitators  for  the  “  six  points  ”  joined  hands  with 
the  antagonists  of  the  New  Poor  Law  and  the  factory 
system  and  spread  the  spirit  of  discontent,  until  the  response 
of  the  masses  was  as  great  as  their  distress.  Within  a  very 
short  time  after  its  publication,  the  People's  Charter  gained 
millions  of  adherents.  The  temper  of  the  people  could  not 
be  mistaken.  Illegal  underground  societies  with  sinister 
objects  sprang  up  alongside  of  Chartist  organizations.  An 
authentic  description  of  one  of  those  societies  is  given  by  a 
contemporary  radical  who  in  1838  was  invited  to  join  a 
“  Foreign  Affairs  Committee  ”  at  Birmingham: 

The  object  of  the  society  I  found  to  be  to  cut  off  Lord 
Palmerston’s  head.  Things  were  bad  among  workmen  in 
those  days,  and  I  had  no  doubt  somebody’s  head  ought  to  be 
cut  off,  and  I  hoped  they  had  hit  upon  the  right  one.  The 
secretary  was  a  Chartist  leader  named  Warden,  who  ended  by 
cutting  his  own  head  off  instead,  which  showed  confusion  of 
138  [138 


THE  PEOPLE 


139] 


139 


ideas  by  which  Lord  Palmerston  profited.  Poor  Warden  cut 
his  own  throat.1 

The  first  important  public  demonstration  in  favor  of  the 
Charter  was  held  at  Glasgow  on  the  28th  of  May,  1838, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  Working  Men’s  Association.  In 
order  to  render  the  demonstration  most  effective,  the  Bir¬ 
mingham  Political  Union  sent  a  fraternal  delegation  headed 
by  Thomas  Attwood.  The  procession  of  about  two  hun¬ 
dred  thousand  working  men  and  women  was  arranged  with 
great  pomp.  Forty  bands  of  music  were  placed  at  equal 
distances,  and  over  two  hundred  flags  and  banners  with 
various  devices  were  carried  along  the  line  of  the  march.  The 
Birmingham  delegates  were  met  with  an  outburst  of  enthu¬ 
siasm  and  were  accorded  great  honors,  in  appreciation  of  the 
prestige  they  lent  to  the  demonstration.  Of  the  speeches, 
the  most  characteristic  was  that  of  Thomas  Attwood,  who 
explained  the  objects  of  the  Charter  and  developed  a  plan 
of  petitioning  Parliament.  Regarding  the  movement  as 
purely  political,  he  warned  the  people  that  they  had  against 


them  “  the  whole  of  the  aristocracy,  nine-tenths  of  the  gen¬ 
try,  the  great  body  of  the  clergy,  and  all  the  pensioners, 
sinecurists,  and  bloodsuckers  that  feed  on  the  vitals  of  the 
people.”  But  he  spoke  in  a  most  hopeful  strai 
class,  declaring  that  if  Parliament  refused  to  concede  the 
popular  demands,  the  workingmen,  together  with  their 
friends  of  the  middle  class,  should  proclaim  a  “  sacred 
strike.”  Attwood’s  expectations  of  support  from  the  middle 
class  was  strengthened  by  the  fact  that  prominent  members 

in  the  demonstration.  The  pro- 

were  not  yet 

. 


vincial  Scotch  merchants 


/ 


1  George  Jacob  Holyoake,  Sixty  Years  of  an  Agitator’s  Life,  Lon¬ 
don,  1900,  vol.  ii,  p.  77. 


140 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[140 

conscious  of  the  real  causes  which  spurred  the  working- 
class  to  the  struggle.  Assurances  of  the  peaceful  designs 
of  the  leaders  were  also  given  by  a  delegate  from  the  Lon¬ 
don  Working  Men’s  Association,  and  the  middle  class  was 
fairly  represented  at  the  banquet  which  took  place  in  the 
evening. 

Things  did  not  run  so  smoothly  at  the  manifestation  in 
Newcastle-on-Tyne  which  was  held  by  about  eighty  thou¬ 
sand  persons  on  the  27th  of  June,  1838,  the  date  of  the 
coronation  of  Victoria.  To  begin  with,  the  inscriptions  on 
the  banners  were  not  of  a  conciliatory  character.  One  of 
them  expressed  exaltation  of  “Freedom”  in  Byron’s  words : 

When  once  more  her  hosts  assemble, 

Let  the  tyrants  only  tremble ; 

Smile  they  at  this  idle  threat? 

'Crimson  tears  may  follow  yet. 

Another  motto,  taken  from  the  same  poet  and  characteristic 
of  a  number  of  others,  referred  to  “  Revolution  ”  : 

I’ve  seen  some  nations,  like  o’er-loaded  asses, 

Kick  off  their  burdens,  meaning  the  high  classes. 

The  speeches  were  delivered  in  a  rather  defiant  strain.  One 
of  the  speakers,  a  working  man,  declared  that  the  people 
would  use  “  every  means, — not  every  legal  means,  mark ! — 
but  every  means  for  the  attainment  of  universal  suffrage.” 
He  adverted  to  the  coronation  of  the  Oueen  in  no  conven- 
tional  style: 

They  had  the  representative  of  the  despot  Nicholas,  and  of 
the  sleek  tyrant  Louis  Philippe,  and  the  representatives  from 
all  their  brother  tyrants,  assisting  to  crown  sovereign  of  a 
great  nation  a  little  girl  who  would  be  more  usefully  and 
properly  employed  at  her  needle;  but  the  people  would  be  no 
longer  led  away  by  their  gaudy  trappings;  they  would  look 
to  themselves  and  to  their  families,  for  if  they  saw  the 


THE  PEOPLE 


141] 


141 


gewgaws  of  royalty  on  the  one  side,  they  would  see  the  damn¬ 
able  Bastile  on  the  other. 


Feargus  O’Connor  was  one  of  the  star  speakers.  With 
his  characteristic  wit  and  sarcasm  he  assailed  the  New 
Poor  Law: 


Harry  Brougham  said  they  wished  no  poor  law  as  every 
young  man  ought  to  lay  up  provision  for  old  age ;  yet,  while 
he  said  this  with  one  side  of  his  mouth,  he  was  screwing  the 
other  side  to  get  his  retiring  pension  raised  from  £4,000  to 
£5,000  a  year.  But  if  the  people  had  their  rights  they  would 
not  pay  his  salary.  Harry  would  go  to  the  treasury,  he  would 
knock,  but  Cerberus  would  not  open  the  door,  he  would  say, 
“  Who  is  there?  ”,  and  then  luckless  Harry  would  answer,  “  It’s 
an  ex-chancellor  coming  for  his  £1,250,  a  quarter’s  salary”; 
but  Cerberus  would  say,  “  There  have  been  a  dozen  of  ye 
here  to-day  already,  and  there  is  nothing  for  ye.”  Then  Harry 
would  cry,  “  Oh!  what  will  become  of  me!  what  shall  I  do!  ” 
and  Cerberus  would  say,  “  Go  into  the  Bastile  that  you  have 
provided  for  the  people !  ”  Then  when  Lord  Harry  and  Lady 
Harry  went  into  the  Bastile,  the  keeper  would  say,  “  This  is 
your  ward  to  the  right,  and  this,  my  lady,  is  your  ward  to  the 
left;  we  are  Malthusians  here,  and  are  afraid  you  would  breed, 
therefore  you  must  be  kept  asunder.”  If  he  witnessed  such  a 
scene  as  this  he  might  have  some  pity  for  Lady  Brougham, 
but  little  pity  would  be  due  to  Lord  Harry.1 

While  O’Connor  was  speaking,  a  body  of  dragoons,  a 
line  of  cavalry  and  a  column  of  infantry  appeared  near  the 
meeting.  This  caused  great  indignation  among  the  crowd. 
O’Connor  expressed  his  regret  that  the  men  were  not  in  a 
condition  to  repel  force  by  force.  He  warned  the  “  brats 
of  aristocracy  ”  to  take  care  “  lest  they  dared  the  people  to 
assemble  and  bring  their  arms  too — they  would  find  there 


1  R.  G.  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  26. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


142 


[142 


were  gallant  hearts  and  virtuous  arms  under  a  black  coat 
as  well  as  under  a  red  one.”  The  troops  were  apparently 
determined  to  provoke  the  people  to  resistance,  but  the  dis¬ 
cretion  of  the  people  averted  a  riot,  and  the  meeting  was 
concluded  in  perfect  order. 

Public  meetings  were  also  held  with  distinct  success  in 
Sunderland  and  Northampton.  The  addresses  by  Vincent 
and  others  were  received  with  great  enthusiasm.  The  Whig 
rule  was  contrasted  with  the  honeyed  promises  made  by  the 
party  before  it  came  into  power.  Unanimous  resolutions 
in  favor  of  the  People’s  Charter  were  carried  with  shouts 
of  joy  and  defiance.  These  meetings  were  followed  on  the 
6th  of  August  by  a  great  demonstration  at  Birmingham. 
Arranged  under  the  auspices  of  the  famous  Political  Union 
of  that  city,  the  parade  attracted  the  workingmen  of  the 
whole  manufacturing  district.  About  two  hundred  thou¬ 
sand  persons  were  said  to  have  participated  in  the  proces¬ 
sion.  The  Birmingham  division  was  followed  by  six  others 
from  Wolverhampton,  Walsall,  Dudley,  Halesowen,  War¬ 
wick  and  Studley. 

The  trades  were  represented  with  their  flags  and  banners 
inscribed  with  appropriate  mottoes.  Feargus  O’Connor 
was  introduced  amidst  loud  cheers,  as  representing  six 
towns  in  Yorkshire.  Thomas  Attwood,  who  presided  at 
the  meeting,  reiterated  his  moral  force  policy,  but  at  the 
same  time  threatened  the  House  of  Commons  that  should 
the  Charter  not  be  speedily  granted,  the  people  would  be 
forced  to  exercise  a  little  gentle  compulsion.  He  again 
suggested  a  general  strike  of  one  week  as  a  means  of  im¬ 
pressing  the  government.  It  was  at  this  meeting  that  O’Con¬ 
nor  for  the  first  time  introduced  his  physical  force  notions. 
The  people  yearned  for  a  strong  word,  and  he  knew  how  to 
please  them.  The  whole  tenor  of  his  speech  was  in  har¬ 
mony  with  the  exhortation  to  “  flesh  every  sword  to  the 


THE  PEOPLE 


143 


143] 

hilt.”  While  the  crowd  demonstrated  its  approval  of 
O’Connor’s  sentiments,  the  local  leaders  could  hardly  re¬ 
press  their  feelings  against  the  speaker.  The  meeting,  how¬ 
ever,  was  concluded  in  perfect  peace.  Important  resolutions 
were  adopted  calling  upon  all  workingmen  to  sign  a  Na¬ 
tional  Petition  for  the  enactment  of  the  Charter  and  to  elect 
delegates  to  a  General  Convention  of  the  Industrious 
Classes.1 

O’Connor’s  allusion  to  physical  force  caused  unfavorable 
comment  in  the  press  and  great  anxiety  among  the  leaders 
of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association.  As  the  17th 
of  September  was  fixed  for  a  grand  demonstration  in  Lon¬ 
don,  the  Association  seized  the  opportunity  to  repudiate 
O’Connor  by  instructing  its  speakers  “  to  keep  as  closely  as 
possible  to  the  two  great  questions  of  the  meeting — the 
Charter  and  the  Petition — and  as  far  as  possible  to  avoid 
all  extraneous  matter  or  party  politics,  as  well  as  every 
abusive  or  violent  expression  which  may  tend  to  injure  our 
glorious  cause.”  2 

Apprehensive  of  fostering  the  sentiments  created  by  the 
Birmingham  manifestation,  the  London  Working  Men’s 
Association  endeavored  to  have  the  metropolitan  meeting 
arranged  with  as  little  pomp  and  display  as  was  possible 
under  the  circumstances.  In  order  to  invest  the  proceedings 
with  some  air  of  authority,  the  high  bailiff  of  Westminster 
was  requested  to  convene  the  meeting.  It  may  have  been 
due  to  these  circumstances  that  the  Palace  Yard  demonstra¬ 
tion,  although  represented  by  delegates  from  eighty-nine 
towns,  was  attended  by  a  comparatively  small  assembly  of 
about  thirty  thousand  persons.  Practically  every  speaker 
cautioned  against  violence.  But  this  very  fact  betrayed 

1  Cf.  infra,  ch.  x. 

2  William  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  181. 


144 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[144 

the  alarm  which  was  felt  by  the  leaders.  It  was  evident 
that  the  mood  of  the  masses  was  beyond  control.  One  of 
the  speakers,  a  delegate  from  Newcastle,  referred  to  the 
right  of  the  people  to  assert  their  own  independence  in  no 
ambiguous  terms : 

The  men  of  the  north  are  well  organized.  The  men  of  New¬ 
castle  would  dare  to  defend  with  their  arms  what  they  utter 
with  their  tongues,  as  the  military  would  have  learned  on  the 
coronation  day  had  they  made  any  attack  upon  the  meeting. 
We  are  willing  to  try  all  moral  means  that  are  left,  we  are 
willing  to  try  a  throne,  so  long  as  it  is  conducive  to  the  happi¬ 
ness  of  the  people;  we  are  willing  to  have  an  aristocracy,  so 
long  as  they  behave  themselves  civilly;  but  we  think  we  have 
a  right  to  have  a  reciprocity  of  rights,  and  if  not,  we  are  pre¬ 
pared  to  go  against  the  throne  and  the  aristocracy.  The  men 
of  the  Tyne  and  the  Wear  would  not  draw  their  swords  until 
their  enemies  draw  upon  them,  but  having  once  put  their  hands 
to  the  plough  they  would  never  look  back.1 

O'Connor,  who  appeared  as  a  representative  of  forty  or 
fifty  towns  in  Scotland  and  England,  delivered  one  of  his 
wittiest  speeches.  The  people,  he  said,  were  called  pick¬ 
pockets.  There  was,  however,  a  striking  difference  between 
a  poor  pickpocket  and  a  rich  pickpocket :  “  the  poor  man 
picked  the  rich  man’s  pocket  to  fill  his  belly,  and  the  rich 
•man  picked  the  poor  man’s  belly  to  fill  his  pocket.”  He 
proclaimed  that  the  people  did  not  want  the  obsolete  con¬ 
stitution  of  tallow  and  wind,  but  a  constitution  “  of  a  rail¬ 
road  genius,  propelled  by  steam  power  and  enlightened  by 
the  rays  of  gas.”  Every  conquest  which  was  called  honor¬ 
able  had  been  achieved  by  physical  force ,  but  the  Chartists 
did  not  want  it,  because  “  if  all  hands  were  pulling  for  uni¬ 
versal  suffrage,  they  would  soon  pull  down  the  stronghold 


1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  49. 


THE  PEOPLE 


145 


145] 

of  corruption.”  O’Connor  was  followed  by  several  speak¬ 
ers  who  alluded  to  physical  force  in  similar  vein.  A  dele¬ 
gate  from  Manchester  expressed  his  conviction  that  the 
people  had  a  right  to  arm  in  defence  of  their  liberties  and, 
if  the  Petition  failed,  he  defied  “  the  power  of  any  govern¬ 
ment  or  any  armed  Bourbon  police  ”  to  put  down  the  armed 
people.1 

The  meeting  which  lasted  over  five  hours  adopted  Lovett’s 
resolution  in  favor  of  the  People’s  Charter  and  responded 
to  the  Birmingham  call  by  collecting  about  sixteen  thou¬ 
sand  signatures  to  the  National  Petition  and  appointing 
eight  delegates  to  the  General  Convention  which  was  to 
meet  in  London  “  to  watch  over  the  presentation  of  the 
Petition  and  to  obtain,  by  all  legal  and  constitutional  means, 
the  enactment  of  the  People’s  Charter.” 

In  order  to  avoid  an  open  rupture  with  O’Connor  and, 
at  the  same  time,  to  counteract  the  effect  of  the  “  physical 
force  swagger  ”,  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association, 
immediately  after  the  Palace  Yard  demonstration,  prepared 
an  Address  to  the  Irish  People ,  imploring  “  the  co-operation 
of  rich  and  poor,  male  and  female,  the  sober,  the  reflecting, 
and  the  industrious  ”  to  carry  forward  the  principles  of 
moral  force: 

We  are  not  going  to  affirm  that  we  have  been  altogether  guilt¬ 
less  of  impropriety  of  language,  for  when  the  eye  dwells  on 
extremest  poverty  trampled  on  by  severe  oppression,  the  heart 
often  forces  a  language  from  the  tongue  which  sober  re¬ 
flection  would  redeem,  and  sound  judgment  condemn.  But 
we  deny  that  we  are  influenced  by  any  other  feelings  than  a 
desire  to  see  our  institutions  peaceably  and  orderly  based 
upon  principles  of  justice.  We  believe  that  a  Parliament  com¬ 
posed  of  the  wise  and  good  of  all  classes,  would  devise  means 


1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  pp.  50-53- 


I46  the  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT  [146 

of  improving  the  condition  of  the  millions,  without  injury  to 
the  just  interests  of  the  few.  We  feel  that  unjust  interests 
have  been  fostered  under  an  unjust  system,  that  it  would  be 
equally  unjust  to  remove  without  due  precaution;  and,  when 
due,  individual  indemnification.  We  are  as  desirous  as  the 
most  scrupulous  conservative  of  protecting  all  that  is  good, 
wise  and  just  in  our  institutions,  and  to  hold  as  sacred  and 
secure  the  domain  of  the  rich  equally  with  the  cottage  of  the 
poor.  But  we  repeat  that  we  seek  to  effect  our  object  in  peace, 
with  no  other  force  than  that  of  argument  or  persuasion.1 

Regardless  of  the  fact  that  the  Address  was  signed  “  on 
behalf  of  one  hundred  and  thirty-six  workingmen’s  and 
radical  associations  ",  actual  events  showed  that  the  influ¬ 
ence  of  the  London  Working  Men’s  Association  was  on  the 
wane.  The  meetings  began  to  assume  a  formidable  aspect 
even  as  early  as  the  autumn  of  1838.  The  Manchester 
demonstration  of  September  25th  was  arranged  on  a 
gigantic  scale.  There  was  scarcely  a  village  in  the  Lan¬ 
cashire  district  that  did  not  contribute  its  quota  to  the  as¬ 
sembly  of  about  three  hundred  thousand  persons  who 
demonstrated  their  determination  to  have  the  Charter  be¬ 
come  the  law  of  the  land.  Practically  all  workshops  and 
factories  throughout  the  district  were  closed.  The  hun¬ 
dreds  of  flags  and  banners  had  various  devices  and  mottoes 
of  a  threatening  character.  “  Murder  demands  justice  ” 
was  the  comment  inscribed  under  a  picture  of  the  Peterloo 
massacre.  Another  banner  represented  a  hand  grasping  a 
dagger  and  bore  the  gruesome  inscription :  “  Oh,  tyrants ! 
will  you  force  us  to  this  ?”  A  spirit  of  enthusiasm  pervaded 
the  line,  and  the  warnings  of  vengeance  brought  forth  deaf¬ 
ening  cheers  of  the  crowds.  O’Connor  and  Stephens,  who 
were  among  the  speakers,  received  a  royal  reception.  The 


1  William  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  188-9. 


THE  PEOPLE 


14  7 


14  7] 

meeting  which  was  presided  over  by  John  Fielden,  the 
popular  advocate  of  factory  reform  and  opponent  of 
the  New  Poor  Law,  adopted  a  resolution  in  favor  of  the 
Charter  and  elected  eight  delegates  to  the  Convention. 

The  Manchester  demonstration  was  followed  on  the  15th 
of  October  by  one  in  the  west  of  Yorkshire,  Peep  Green 
having  been  selected  as  the  fittest  place  between  Leeds  and 
Huddersfield.  The  gathering  comprised  about  two  hun¬ 
dred  and  fifty  thousand  persons,  who  enjoyed  all  the  attrac¬ 
tions  of  the  other  manifestations,  including  bands  of 
music,  banners,  flags,  inscriptions,  and  addresses  by  O’Con¬ 
nor  and  other  stars.  Similar  demonstrations  were  subse¬ 
quently  held  in  Liverpool  and  in  a  number  of  other  cities 
all  over  the  country,  which  adopted  resolutions  in  favor  of 
the  People’s  Charter  and  elected  representatives  to  the  Gen¬ 
eral  Convention. 

The  people  of  the  West  were  agitated  by  their  favorite 
orator,  Henry  Vincent.  He  kept  the  workingmen  of  Bris¬ 
tol,  Bath,  Bradford,  Cheltenham  and  other  cities  in  a  state 
of  constant  excitement.  A  great  pet  of  the  women,  he 
organized  a  number  of  radical  female  associations,  and 
hundreds  of  names  were  enrolled  every  day  in  favor  of  the 
Charter.  He  also  succeeded  in  establishing  his  supremacy 
in  the  Welsh  territory.  This  was  a  distinct  victory  for  the 
young  and  ardent  orator.  On  account  of  the  relatively  high 
wages  paid  to  the  operatives  in  the  coal  and  iron  districts, 
the  Welsh  workingmen  had  been  considered  immune  from 
all  radicalism.  Vincent,  however,  roused  the  dormant  dis¬ 
content  of  the  wage-earners  and  within  a  short  time,  in 
spite  of  the  urgent  appeals  made  by  high  personages  against 
the  Charter,  gained  the  unflinching  support  of  the  masses 
and  actually  prepared  them  for  the  “  death-dance  of  revo¬ 
lution.” 

The  frequent  manifestations  in  favor  of  the  Charter 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


148 


[148 


fostered  the  spirit  of  revolt.  The  six  points  were  repre¬ 
sented  as  tantamount  to  the  sum  total  of  human  happiness, 
and  the  working  people  decided  to  win  the  Charter  at  all 
hazards.  As  the  demonstrations  by  day  incurred  loss  of 
time  during  working  hours  and  as  the  authorities  started 
to  thwart  indoor  meetings  by  refusing  the  use  of  the  com¬ 
modious  town  halls,  the  leaders  seized  the  opportunity  of 
fanning  the  passions  of  the  people  by  arranging  a  series 
of  torch-light  processions  in  a  number  of  cities,  including 
the  industrial  centres  of  Bolton,  Ashton,  Stockport,  Staley- 
bridge,  Hyde  and  Leigh.  The  meetings  proved  a  great  suc¬ 
cess,  attracting  in  each  case  tens  of  thousands  of  working 
men  and  women  who  pledged  their  lives  in  allegiance  to 
the  cause.  The  processions  usually  passed  the  principal 
streets  of  each  city  cheering  the  leaders  and  denouncing 
those  newspapers,  magistrates  and  manufacturers  who  had 
shown  antagonism  to  the  movement.  Bands  of  music  pre- 
ceeded  the  march,  while  banners  of  various  sizes  and  colors 
and  bearing  revolutionary  devices  were  carried  in  the  blaz¬ 
ing  stream  of  torch  lights.  “  For  children  and  wife,  well 
war  to  the  knife!  “  He  that  hath  no  sword,  let  him  sell 
his  garment  and  buy  one  ” ;  “  Remember  the  bloody  deeds 
of  Peterloo  ”,  and  “  Tyrants,  believe  and  tremble  ”, — these 
were  common  mottoes  at  the  demonstrations.  The  meet¬ 
ings  were  always  attended  by  one  or  more  of  the  lions  of. 
the  movement, — O’Connor,  Stephens,  and  Harney  being  the 
chief  speakers.  At  the  torch-light  meeting  which  was  held 
on  the  14th  of  November,  1838,  at  Hyde,  Stephens,  sur¬ 
rounded  by  a  large  number  of  men  wearing  and  carrying 
upon  poles  red  caps  of  liberty,  branded  the  manufacturers 
as  a  gang  of  murderers  whose  blood  was  required  to  satisfy 
the  demands  of  public  justice.  He  advised  every  one  of 
his  hearers  to  get  a  large  carving  knife  which  might  be 
used  to  cut  either  a  rasher  of  bacon  or  the  men  who  op¬ 
posed  their  demands. 


THE  PEOPLE 


149 


149] 

The  agitators  of  physical  force  found  the  field  ready.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  thousands  of  men  in  all  parts  of  the  coun¬ 
try  were  at  that  time  secretly  making  arms.  The  Man¬ 
chester  delegate  to  the  Palace  Yard  demonstration  in  London 
declared  that  the  people  of  Lancashire  were  armed,  that  he 
himself  had  seen  the  arms  hanging  over  the  mantlepieces 
of  the  poor.1  At  the  torch-light  meetings,  weapons  were 
brandished  and  frequent  discharges  from  firearms  were 
made  for  no  other  purpose  than  to  impress  the  authorities 
with  the  fact  that  the  people  were  armed.  At  the  Hyde 
meeting  Stephens  asked  his  hearers  if  they  were  ready  to 
resist  force  by  force.  The  loud  firing  of  arms  and  the 
forest  of  hands  raised  in  response  to  his  question  satisfied 
the  agitator  that  it  was  all  right,  that  the  people  knew  how 
to  repel  the  enemy  in  a  way  which  would  tell  sharper  tales 
than  their  tongues.2 

The  excitement  grew  even  more  intense  after  the  publica¬ 
tion  of  a  letter  which  Lord  John  Russell  sent  on  the  22nd 
of  November,  1838,  to  the  Lancashire  magistrates,  re¬ 
questing  them  to  announce  the  illegality  of  torchlight  meet¬ 
ings  and  to  use  all  means  to  prevent  and  disperse  such  gath¬ 
erings.  Lord  Russell  was  denounced  as  the  tool  of  the 
middle  class  particularly  because  only  a  few  weeks  before 
he  had  given  expression  to  sentiments  of  a  diametrically 
opposite  nature.  Speaking  at  a  dinner  given  in  his  honor 
by  the  civic  authorities  of  Liverpool  and  referring  to  the 
public  demonstrations  in  favor  of  the  Charter,  he  said : 

There  were  some,  perhaps,  who  would  put  down  such 
meetings ;  but  such  was  not  his  opinion  nor  that  of  the  Gov¬ 
ernment  with  which  he  acted.  He  thought  the  people  had  a 
right  to  meet.  If  they  had  no  grievances,  common  sense  would 

1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  52. 

*  Ibid.,  p.  97. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


150 


[150 


speedily  come  to  the  rescue  and  put  an  end  to  those  meetings. 
It  was  not  from  free  discussion,  it  was  not  from  the  unchecked 
declaration  of  public  opinion  that  government  had  anything  to 
fear.  There  was  fear  when  men  were  driven  by  force  to 
secret  combinations.  There  was  the  fear,  there  was  the 
danger,  and  not  in  free  discussion.1 


The  people,  in  their  indignation,  defied  the  government 
and  publicly  trampled  under  foot  the  royal  proclamation 
of  the  middle  of  December  which,  on  penalty  of  imprison¬ 
ment,  enjoined  all  persons  to  desist  from  participating  in 
torch-light  meetings.  The  chasm  between  the  workingmen 
and  the  middle  class  became  ever  wider.  If  a  workingman 
failed  to  abuse  the  middle  class,  he  was  himself  vilified  and 

/ 

denounced.  The  bearing  of  arms  became  more  general. 
Holyoake  witnessed  in  Birmingham  that  those  who  had  no 
better  weapons  “  sharpened  an  old  file  and  stuck  it  in  a 
haft.”  2  The  Dundee  Advertiser  of  April  12,  1839,  de¬ 
clared  that  “  a  number  of  infatuated  individuals  ”  had  com¬ 
menced  drilling  and  intimated  that  the  authorities  were 
keeping  an  eye  over  them :  “  Shackles  in  place  of  pikes  will 
shortly  be  the  upshot  to  those  who  engage  in  such  danger¬ 
ous  pastime.”  Even  women  started  to  organize  themselves 
and  in  several  instances  procured  arms.3  This  was  par¬ 
ticularly  striking  in  Welsh  towns  where  Vincent  had  perfect 
control  over  the  situation  and  where  he  had  organized  a 
number  of  female  Chartist  associations.  At  a  public  meet¬ 
ing  in  Pentonville  he  invoked  the  people  to  swear  that  they 
would  be  ready  to  act  if  their  demands  were  rejected  by  the 
government,  and  he  called  upon  all  who  were  prepared  to 
turn  out  to  hold  up  their  arms.  His  appeal  was  answered 

1  Cf.  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xlix,  1839,  p.  455. 

*  Holyoake,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  83. 

5  Cf.  Richard  Marsden  in  The  London  Democrat,  May  11,  1839. 


THE  PEOPLE 


151] 


151 


by  thunderous  shouts,  “We  swear!  We  swear!”  and  a 
majority  of  those  present  readily  raised  their  arms.1 

The  arrest  of  Stephens,  the  first  Chartist  victim,  for  at¬ 
tending  illegal  meetings  and  using  violent  language,  in¬ 
creased  the  excitement  to  an  alarming  extent.  The  masses 
were  not  satisfied  with  the  mere  possession  of  arms  and 
sought  practical  advice  on  military  operations.  The  widely 
circulated  Defensive  Instructions  to  the  People  by  Colonel 
Macerone  was  supplemented  by  special  articles  on  Military 
Science  by  Major  Beniowski  in  The  London  Democrat. 
Extolling  the  “  science  of  killing  ”  as  the  most  useful  and 
the  most  sublime  of  all  sciences,  small  bands  of  men  were 
instructed  how  to  resist  the  attacks  of  a  more  numerous 
enemy  and  how  to  render  offensive  operations  most  advan¬ 
tageous  for  strategical  and  tactical  purposes.2 


The  military  science  is,  simply,  that  which  teaches  you  how 
to  maim  and  kill  as  many  of  your  enemies  as  possible,  and  also 
how  to  protect  yourselves  against  a  similar  propensity  of  your 
opponents.  If  those  who  first  reduced  this  “  glorious  ”  whole¬ 
sale  murder  to  rules  had  no  end  in  view  but  to  gratify  the 
beastly  passions  of  the  few,  they  were  abominable  monsters, 
whom  it  would  have  been  the  duty  of  every  honest  man  to 
smother  at  their  birth.  But  if  their  intention  was  the  de¬ 
fence  of  the  enslaved,  oppressed,  and  starving  millions,  to 
curb  ambition  or  to  oppose  the  claims  of  incomprehensible 
rights,  mankind  ought  to  erect  altars  to  their  memory.  In  this 
last  case,  the  science  of  killing  and  destroying  is  the  most 


1  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  November,  1839,  2d  ed.,  Newport, 
1881,  p.  15. 

2  The  attitude  of  the  Chartists  towards  war  and  armaments  was 
practically  identical  both  in  spirit  and  expression  with  the  ante  bellum 
professions  of  the  modern  socialists.  In  view  of  the  general  interest 
in  the  present  war,  it  was  considered  not  amiss  to  reprint  a  character¬ 
istic  dialogue  between  a  moral  force  Whig  and  a  Chartist,  giving  the 
“school-master’s”  view  of  the  subject.  See  Appendix  D. 


*52 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[152 

useful  and  necessary  of  all  the  sciences ;  it  is,  in  fact,  the  only 
one  which,  if  universally  known  by  the  people  at  large,  could 
prevent  homicide  at  all.  Unhappily  this  terribly  sublime 
knowledge  is  not  to  be  attained  without  difficulty.  ...  It  is 
only  by  a  continual,  active,  and  concentrated  application  of  an 
undivided  mind,  prompted  by  a  peculiar  natural  disposition, 
or  inflamed  by  extraordinary  events,  that  any  man  can  attain  it.1 

The  extraordinary  events  were  in  the  process  of  realiza¬ 
tion.  The  talk  of  preparedness  and  resistance  impelled  the 
physical  force  advocates  to  attempt  a  wide  agitation  among 
the  soldiers.  The  Chartists  were  urged  to  impart  all  in¬ 
formation  about  the  movement  to  the  men  in  the  barracks 
and  were  assured  that  the  soldiers  were  “  on  the  right 
scent  ” ,  that  they  read  O’Connor’s  Northern  Star  and  that 
even  the  London  Democrat  “  found  its  way  into  the  army  ”. 
Discussing  the  question  as  to  what  the  soldiers  would  do  in 
the  coming  struggle,  a  correspondent  of  the  physical  force 
weekly  2  expressed  his  belief,  which  was  based  on  personal 
observations,  that  they  would  not  defend  “  the  citadel  of 
corruption  ”  by  cutting  the  throats  of  their  fathers,  their 
brothers,  their  mothers,  their  sisters  and  sweethearts,  but, 
on  the  contrary,  would  “  supply  the  places  of  the  moral- 
force  men  ”  who  would  turn  traitors  to  the  cause.  Whether 
or  not  the  people  shared  this  belief,  the  “  extraordinary 
events  ”  ran  into  a  different  channel. 

1  The  London  Democrat,  April  27,  1839. 

2  Ibid.,  May  4,  1839. 


CHAPTER  X 


The  Petition,  the  Convention  and  the  Government 

The  idea  of  a  National  Petition,  as  well  as  the  plan  of  a 
General  Convention  of  the  Industrious  Classes,  originated 
with  the  Birmingham  Political  Union.  Nothing  can  be 
farther  from  the  truth  than  the  “  historical  ”  assertion  that 
the  Petition  and  the  Convention  were  undertaken  in  simu¬ 
lation  of  the  tactics  of  the  French  Revolutionists.  Both 
proposals  emanated  from  the  moral  force  group  at  the  Bir¬ 
mingham  demonstration  of  August  6,  1838,  but  once 
adopted  they  were  made  most  use  of  by  the  preachers  of 
revolt. 

The  National  Petition  is  credited  to  the  pen  of  R.  K. 
Douglas,  the  editor  of  the  Birmingham  Journal.  It  de¬ 
mands  the  enactment  of  but  five  points — that  of  equal  rep¬ 
resentation  having  been  omitted  probably  because  it  was 
confounded  with  universal  suffrage.  The  petition  is 
couched  in  terms  far  from  revolutionary.  It  is  lacking  not 
only  in  vigor  of  expression,  but  also  in  definiteness  of  aim.. 
The  author  apparently  took  extreme  caution  not  to  offend 
any  class  or  any  group  of  individuals.  The  influence  of 
Thomas  Attwood  is  seen  throughout  the  petition,  par¬ 
ticularly  in  the  demand  to  abolish  “  the  laws  which  make 
food  dear,  and  those  which,  by  making  money  scarce,  make 
labor  cheap  Not  a  word  is  said  about  the  New  Poor 
Law  or  about  factory  legislation ;  not  a  hint  is  given  of  the 
unjust  distribution  of  wealth.  On  the  contrary,  repeated 
references  are  made  to  the  burden  imposed  on  the  capitalist 
153]  153 


< 


154 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[154 


class,  and  the  House  is  told  “  that  the  capital  of  the  master 
must  no  longer  be  deprived  of  its  due  reward  ”.1  The  peti¬ 
tion  complains  against  the  load  of  taxes  which  affects  capi¬ 
tal  as  well  as  labor,  and  alludes  to  other  matters  which,  in 
previous  petitions,  were  labeled  by  Bronterre  as  “  uncon- 
sequential  rubbish  ”.2  It  would  have  been  amazing  to  see 
the  working  class  agitated  by  the  Petition,  had  that  agita¬ 
tion  not  been  the  expression  of  a  much  deeper  cause.  It 
was  the  idea  of  the  Petition  and  not  its  contents  that  con¬ 
tained  the  promise  of  the  holy  land  and  that  animated  the 
people.  It  is  on  this  account  that  the  National  Petition  must 
be  considered  one  of  the  most  remarkable  documents  in 
the  history  of  the  English  labor  movement.  The  call  for  a 
national  subscription  for  the  petition  received  a  generous 
response.  Men  and  women  devoted  night  after  night  to 
the  collection  of  funds  and  signatures  and  submitted  good- 
humoredly  to  every  sort  of  reply  to  their  solicitations.  The 
contributions  were  necessary  in  order  to  defray  the  cost  of 
the  campaign  and  to  support  the  members  of  the  Conven¬ 
tion. 

The  opening  of  the  General  Convention  of  the  Indus¬ 
trious  Classes  took  place  on  the  4th  of  February,  1839,  at 
the  British  Coffee  House,  Cockspur  Street,  London.  The 
subsequent  sessions  were  held  at  the  Hall  of  the  Dr.  John¬ 
son  Tavern,  Fleet  Street.  Of  the  fifty-three  delegates  rep¬ 
resenting  various  cities  from  all  parts  of  the  kingdom,  three 
were  magistrates,  six  newspaper  editors,  two  clergymen, 
two  physicians,  while  the  others  were  shopkeepers,  trades¬ 
men  and  laborers.  The  objects  of  the  General  Convention 
were  declared  to  be  as  follows : 

1.  To  collect  the  signatures  already  appended  to  the  National 

1  See  Appendix  C. 

2  Cf.  supra,  p.  82. 


155]  PETITI0N>  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  ^ 

Petition  in  different  parts  of  the  Kingdom,  and  to  use  every 
possible  exertion  to  cause  it  to  be  signed  by  every  reformer  in 
these  realms. 

2.  To  use  the  most  efficient  means  and  choose  the  most  fit¬ 
ting  time  for  introducing  the  National  Petition  into  the  Com¬ 
mons’  House  of  Parliament. 

3.  To  select  such  members  of  Parliament  as  the  majority  of 
the  delegates  may  deem  proper,  for  introducing  the  bill  en¬ 
titled  the  Peoples  Charter  into  both  Houses  of  Parliament 
and  enforcing  its  adoption. 

4.  To  wait  upon  the  members  of  the  House  of  Commons 
(and,  if  necessary,  upon  Her  Majesty  and  the  Peers  of  these 
realms)  and  individually  and  collectively  enforce  upon  them 
the  claims  of  the  industrious  millions  to  their  just  share  of 
political  power  and  the  necessity  and  justice  for  complying 
with  their  demands  by  supporting  the  National  Petition  and 
voting  for  the  People’s  Charter. 

5.  To  create  and  extend,  by  every  constitutional  means,  an 
enlightened  and  powerful  public  opinion  in  favor  of  the  above 
objects,  and  justly  and  righteously  impress  that  opinion  upon 
the  legislature,  as  the  best  means  of  securing  the  prosperity 
and  happiness  of  our  country  and  averting  those  calamities 
which  exclusive  legislation  and  corrupt  government  will  neces¬ 
sarily  produce. 

Notwithstanding  this  peaceful  declaration,  the  delegates 
repeatedly  proclaimed  the  Convention  the  only  representa¬ 
tive  and  legally  elected  body,  assumed  functions  of  a  legis¬ 
lative  body,  and  adopted  a  set  of  rules  and  regulations,  in¬ 
cluding  those  relating  to  future  elections  of  delegates  and 
the  duties  of  the  constituencies.  The  presentation  of  the 
National  Petition  was  postponed  until  the  6th  of  May,  in 
order  to  procure  a  larger  number  of  signatures.  Mission¬ 
aries  were  sent  out  to  various  towns  to  agitate  for  the 
Charter  and  to  collect  signatures  to  the  Petition.  In  the 
interim,  the  delegates  in  London  busied  themselves  with  a 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[156 


variety  of  problems.  The  “  grievances  of  Ireland  ”,  “  the 
suffering  in  the  manufacturing  districts  ”,  “  the  factory 
system  ”,  “  the  New  Rural  Police  Bill  ”,  were  but  a  few  of 
the  subjects  that  gave  rise  to  long  and  heated  discussions. 
“  In  fact,”  Lovett  confesses,  “  the  love  of  talk  was  as 
characteristic  of  our  little  house  as  the  big  one  at  West¬ 
minster.”  1  Of  more  immediate  interest  was  the  question 
of  “  ulterior  measures  ”  to  be  adopted  if  the  petition  were 
rejected  on  the  6th  of  May.  Care  was  taken  that  the  dis¬ 
cussions  and  proceedings  of  the  Convention  be  reported  in 
a  way  to  excite  the  passions  of  the  masses.  The  addresses 
of  the  delegates  dwelling  at  length  on  the  distress  and  mis¬ 
ery  of  the  people  were  printed  and  distributed  broadcast 
among  the  industrial  and  agricultural  wage-earners.  The 
speech  of  delegate  Richard  Marsden  of  Preston  attracted 
particular  attention  because  it  was  not  an  elaborated  state¬ 
ment  of  a  social  investigator  or  an  embellished  picture  of 
a  professional  agitator.  It  was  the  cry  of  actual  despair 
that  pierced  the  hearts  of  all  who  heard  or  read  his  narra¬ 
tive.  As  an  illustration  of  the  effects  of  the  factory  sys¬ 
tem,  Marsden  presented  the  case  of  his  own  wife  and  chil¬ 
dren  who  were  entirely  destitute  of  the  bare  necessities  of 
life.  With  an  infant  at  her  breast,  his  wife  was  so  ema¬ 
ciated  in  consequence  of  lack  of  nourishment  that  when 
the  baby  tried  to  nurse,  it  drew  the  mother’s  blood.2 

The  division  in  the  ranks  of  the  Chartist  delegates  was 
evident  from  the  beginning.  The  first  collision  between 
the  moral  force  adherents  and  the  followers  of  the  Marat 
policy  took  place  at  the  very  opening  of  the  Convention.  At 
the  first  few  sessions  the  London  Working  Men’s  Associa¬ 
tion  had  the  upper  hand.  Lovett  was  elected  secretary  in 


1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  204. 

2  This  statement  was  subsequently  confirmed  to  Gammage  by  Mrs. 
Marsden.  See  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  108. 


! 57]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT 

spite  of  the  strong  opposition  on  the  part  of  the  physical 
force  advocates.  The  missionaries  who  were  sent  out  of 
the  Metropolis  to  obtain  signatures  to  the  National  Peti¬ 
tion  were  instructed  “  to  refrain  from  all  violent  and  un¬ 
constitutional  language  and  not  to  infringe  the  law  in  any 
manner  by  word  or  deed/'  The  spirit  of  enthusiasm  that 
pervaded  the  Convention  did  not  last  long,  however.  Some 
delegates  soon  tired  of  formal  speeches  and  grew  impatient 
with  the  counselors  of  a  policy  of  peaceful  waiting.  In 
allegiance  to  the  London  Democratic  Association,  they 
created  discord  within  and  without  the  Convention  assem¬ 
bly.  Harney  was  most  emphatic  in  his  condemnation  of 
the  cowardice  and  imbecility  of  the  Convention  and  urged 
the  people  to  prepare  for  the  approaching  struggle.  At 
Smithfield  he  appeared  at  an  open-air  meeting  wearing  a 
red  cap  of  liberty  in  imitation  of  the  French  Revolution¬ 
ists.  The  London  Democratic  Association,  of  which  he 
was  secretary,  adopted  three  resolutions  : 

1.  That  if  the  Convention  did  its  duty,  the  Charter  would 
be  the  law  of  the  land  in  less  than  a  month. 

2.  That  no  delay  should  take  place  in  the  presentation  of  the 
National  Petition. 

3.  That  every  act  of  injustice  and  oppression  should  be 
immediately  met  by  resistance. 

These  resolutions  were  submitted  to  the  Convention  on 
the  4th  of  March  and  caused  several  motions  to  be  made 
condemnatory  of  the  conduct  of  the  extreme  Chartists. 
One  delegate  censured  Harney  for  making  use  of  French 
revolutionary  expressions  and  French  emblems.  Another 
demanded  an  apology  from  Harney  and  his  followers,  on 
penalty  of  expulsion,  for  addressing  the  resolutions  to  the 
Convention.  Even  Bronterre  recorded  his  opinion  that  the 
Convention  must  be  on  guard  not  to  prejudice  the  govern- 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


ment  against  the  Petition,  while  Lovett’s  close  friends,. 
Hetherington,  Cleave,  and  others,  protested  against  the  use 
of  all  emblems  which  might  compromise  the  Convention 
and  thus  injure  the  cause.  In  the  language  of  Lovett, 
Harney  and  two  other  delegates  “  deemed  it  advisable  to 
make  the  apology  required.”  1  It  was,  however,  after  a 
lapse  of  but  a  few  days  that  the  censured  agitators  suc¬ 
ceeded  in  establishing  their  supremacy.  On  the  nth  of 
March,  1839,  Harney,  O’Connor,  Frost,  Bronterre,  and 
others  addressed  a  crowded  meeting  which  was  called  under 
the  auspices  of  the  Convention,  at  the  Crown  and  Anchor, 
and  at  which  they  publicly  attacked  the  inactivity  of  the 
Convention  and  exhorted  the  Chartists  to  arm  themselves 
for  the  approaching  crisis.  Bronterre  declared  that  the 
only  reason  he  did  not  advise  the  people  to  arm  themselves 
was  because  the  law  did  not  let  him.  He  was  only  a  his¬ 
torian,  he  said,  and  merely  reported  the  “  fact  ”  that  all  the 
people  of  Leeds  and  of  Lancashire  had  procured  arms. 
While  he  could  not  urge  his  hearers  to  do  likewise,  he  was 
certain  that  the  Petition  would  be  helped  along,  if  all  the 
people  of  England  followed  the  example  of  his  friends  in 
the  North.  He  accordingly  appealed  to  them  to  organize, 
to  put  themselves  in  such  a  position  of  defense  that  if  an 
attempt  were  made  to  suspend  the  laws  and  the  constitu¬ 
tion  of  the  country,  they  should  be  able  to  send  the  traitors 
to  eternity.  The  enthusiastic  cheers  of  the  audience  at 
every  allusion  to  physical  force  left  no  doubt  that  the 
metropolitan  workingmen  endorsed  the  sentiments  of  the 
speakers. 

The  speeches  stirred  up  a  great  deal  of  hostile  criticism 
in  the  press  which  provoked  three  Birmingham  delegates 
to  tender  their  resignations  “  because  the  Convention  was 


1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  204. 


I59]  PETITION ,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  159 

not  guided  by  principles  of  peace,  law  and  order.”  This 
act  on  the  part  of  the  moral  force  delegates  branded  them 
in  the  eyes  of  the  people  as  traitors  and  gave  a  new  impetus 
to  the  physical  force  agitation.  It  was  then  that  the  Lon¬ 
don  Democrat  was  established  to  launch  a  systematic  cam¬ 
paign  for  preparedness  and  to  preach  insurrection  as  the 
only  means  for  the  people  to  obtain  the  Charter.  All  legal 
and  constitutional  efforts  inspired  little  hope  for  the  imme¬ 
diate  success  of  the  National  Petition,  and  the  workingmen 
were  urged  to  lose  no  time  in  organizing  and  preparing 
themselves  for  the  coming  struggle,  “  such  as  the  world 
has  not  yet  witnessed.”  The  Chartists  were  advised  to 
inscribe  on  their  banners  the  mottoes :  ‘k  Liberty  or  death  ”, 
“  the  People’s  Charter  and  no  further  delay  ”,  “  the  Peo¬ 
ple’s  Charter — peaceably  if  we  can,  forcibly  if  we  must  ”, 
and  the  people  were  reminded  that  their  tyrants  would 
never  concede  justice  till  they  were  compelled,  till  they  were 
overcome  by  fire  and  sword  and  exterminated  from  the  face 
of  the  earth. 

The  Chartists  foresaw  the  possibility  of  a  prorogation 
of  Parliament  before  the  presentation  of  the  Petition  on 
the  6th  of  May,  or  before  the  House  could  be  tested 
respecting  the  Charter.  In  case  of  such  a  contingency, 
Harney  supported  Bronterre’s  recommendation  that,  op 
the  day  appointed  by  the  Queen’s  proclamation  for  a  new 
election,  the  people  of  each  county,  city  and  borough 
should  assemble  at  the  proper  places  and  nominate  men 
pledged  to  the  Charter.  He  was  certain  that  the  universal 
suffrage  candidates  would  be  elected  in  nineteen  out  of 
every  twenty  cases.  He  realized  that  the  election  of  repre¬ 
sentatives  without  enabling  them  to  take  their  seats  in  the 
House  of  Commons  would  present  “  the  veriest  farce  im¬ 
aginable  ”.  It  was,  therefore,  necessary  that  each  elected 


! 6o  THE  CHARTIST  MO VEMENT  [  1 60 

representative  should  be  furnished  with  a  bodyguard  of 
sturdy  sans-culottes : 


By  the  time  the  whole  of  the  representatives  arrived  in  the 
environs  of  the  metropolis,  they  would  have  with  them  not 
less  than  a  million  of  men.  This  would  soon  settle  the  matter. 
“  The  million  of  men,”  with  their  representatives,  would  en¬ 
camp  for  one  night  on  Hampstead-heath,  and  the  following 
morning  march  upon  London,  where  myriads  would  hail  with 
songs  of  joy  their  march  through  Parliament,  safely  conduct¬ 
ing  their  representatives  past  the  Horse-guards,  should  the 
shopocratic-elected  scoundrels  be  fools  enough  to  have  pre¬ 
viously  seated  themselves  in  the  tax-trap.  The  voice  of  the 
people  crying,  “  Make  way  for  better  men,”  would  scatter 
them  like  chaff  before  the  wind ;  or,  should  they  hesitate  to 
fly,  the  job  will  soon  be  settled  by  their  being  tied  neck  and 
heels  and  flung  into  the  Thames.  As  to  resistance  on  the  part 
of  the  soldiery,  the  idea  is  not  to  be  entertained.  What  army 
could  withstand  a  million  of  armed  men f  For,  of  course, 
every  man  would  come  prepared  for  the  worst;  and  even 
should  the  tyrants  be  mad  enough  to  provoke  a  conflict,  can 
the  result  be  doubtful?  No;  within  a  week  not  a  despot’s 
breath  would  pollute  the  air  of  England.1 


The  missionaries  did  not  carry  out  the  instructions  of 
the  Convention  to  refrain  from  all  violent  language.  Vin¬ 
cent  especially  exhorted  the  people  to  be  prepared  to  resist 
the  government.  At  several  meetings  in  Welsh  towns,  he 
called  upon  the  working  class  to  be  ready  to  act  after  the 
6th  of  May,  and  that  every  hill  and  valley  should  be  pre¬ 
pared  to  send  forth  its  army,  if  required  by  the  Conven¬ 
tion.  At  Newport  he  concluded  his  speech  with  the  invo¬ 
cation:  “  To  your  tents,  O  Israel!  and  then  with  one  voice, 
one  heart,  and  one  blo\^  perish  the  privileged  orders! 
Death  to  the  aristocracy!  ”  In  Pentonville  he  attacked  the 


1  The  London  Democrat,  April  27,  1839. 


! 5i ]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  id 

government  as  an  atrocious  and  cannibal  system :  it  doomed 
men,  women  and  children  to  toil  in  factories  from  morning 
till  night  in  a  state  approaching  starvation,  for  the  purpose 
of  increasing  the  wealth  of  the  aristocracy.1 

Far  from  rebuking  its  missionaries,  the  Convention 
acted  in  harmony  with  the  prevailing  spirit  of  the  masses 
and,  after  a  long  discussion,  adopted  a  resolution  to  the 
effect  “  that  it  was  admitted  by  the  highest  authorities,  be¬ 
yond  the  possibility  of  doubt,  that  the  people  had  the  right 
to  use  arms.” 2 

In  the  meantime  the  government  kept  a  vigilant  eye  on 
the  movements  of  the  members  of  the  Convention  and  the 
active  Chartists.  Venomous  newspaper  reports  of  the 
Chartist  meetings  provoked  the  government  to  introduce  a 
wide  system  of  espionage.  The  spies  simulated  great  de¬ 
votion  to  the  cause  and  instigated  the  masses  to  “  speak 
out  ”  and  to  “  prove  to  the  government  that  the  people  were 
in  earnest.”  Zealous  to  produce  proof  to  the  government 
of  their  usefulness  and  of  their  alertness  to  “  discover  ” 
all  Chartist  plots,  they  adopted  a  favorite  scheme  of  teach¬ 
ing  the  credulous  workingmen  how  to  destroy  property 
and  strike  terror  into  the  hearts  of  the  “  despots  One 
of  these  provocateurs,  Holyoake  writes,  produced  an 
explosive  liquid  which,  he  said,  could  be  poured  into  the 
sewers  and,  when  ignited,  would  blow  up  the  whole  city  of 
London.  “  This  satanic  preparation  was  tried  in  a  cellar 
in  Judd  Street,  while  I  was  taking  tea  in  the  back  parlor 
above.  I  did  not  know  at  the  time  of  the  operation  going 
on  below,  or  it  might  have  interfered  with  my  satisfaction 
in  the  repast  on  which  I  was  engaged/’3 

1  Cf.  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  2nd  ed.,  Newport,  1889,  pp.  15- 
16;  also  The  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire,  London, 
1840,  p.  25. 

2  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  205. 

3  Holyoake,  op.  cit.,  vol.  ii,  p.  4. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


162 


[162 


The  activities  of  magistrate  John  Frost,  the  Welsh  dele¬ 
gate  to  the  Convention,  caused  much  public  discussion,  and 
Lord  John  Russell  was  taunted  from  many  quarters  for 
the  appointment  he  had  made.  Russell  then  sent  Frost  a 
letter  inquiring  whether  he  was  a  delegate  to  the  Conven¬ 
tion,  as  well  as  whether  he  had  attended  a  public  meeting 
at  Pontypool,  at  which  inflammatory  language  was  used, 
and  notifying  him  that  such  actions,  if  true,  must  cause 
his  name  to  be  erased  from  the  Commission  of  the  Peace 
for  the  county  of  Monmouth.  The  answer  which  Frost 
sent  to  Russell  gained  him  unanimous  praise  from  his  col¬ 
leagues  who  paid  him  due  tribute  at  a  dinner  given  in  his 
honor  in  London.  His  letter,  dated  at  Newport,  January 
19,  1839,  contained  a  spirited  rebuke  of  the  Secretary  of 
State.  Its  haughty  defiance  was  characteristic  of  the 
period  of  unrest.  He  writes : 1 


In  your  Lordship’s  letter  of  the  16th,  there  is  a  mistake.  I 
am  not  a  magistrate  for  the  county  of  Monmouth,  but  for  the 
borough  of  Newport,  in  the  county  of  Monmouth.  In  the 
spring  of  1835  the  council  of  the  borough  recommended  me  as 
a  proper  person  to  be  a  justice  of  the  peace.  I  was  appointed, 
and  I  believe  that  the  inhabitants  will  bear  honorable  testimony 
as  to  the  manner  in  which  I  have  performed  the  duties  of  that 
office.  Whether  your  Lordship  will  retain  my  name,  or  cause 
it  to  be  erased,  is  to  me  a  matter  of  perfect  indifference,  for  I 
set  no  value  on  an  office  dependant  for  its  continuance,  not 
according  to  the  mode  in  which  its  duties  are  performed,  but 
on  the  will  of  a  Secretary  of  State. 

For  what  does  your  Lordship  think  it  incumbent  to  get  my 
name  erased  from  the  commission  of  the  peace?  For  attend¬ 
ing  a  meeting  at  Pontypool,  on  the  1st  of  January?  If  the 
public  papers  can  be  credited,  your  Lordship  declared  that 


1  See  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire,  London,  1840,. 

pp.  n-13. 


163]  PETITION ,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  ^3 

such  meetings  were  not  only  legal  but  commendable.  But 
“  violent  and  inflammatory  language  was  used  at  that  meet¬ 
ing/’  .  .  .  There  was  a  time  when  the  Whig  Ministry  was 
not  so  fastidious  as  to  violent  and  inflammatory  language 
uttered  at  public  meetings. 

By  what  authority  does  your  Lordship  assume  a  power  over 
conduct  of  mine  unconnected  with  my  office  ?  By  what  author¬ 
ity  does  your  Lordship  assign  any  action  of  mine,  as  a  private 
individual,  as  a  justification  for  erasing  my  name  from  the 
commission  of  the  peace?  Am  I  to  hold  no  opinion  of  my 
own,  in  respect  to  public  matters  ?  Am  I  to  be  prohibited  from 
expressing  that  opinion,  if  it  be  unpleasing  to  Lord  J.  Russell? 
If,  in  expressing  that  opinion,  I  act  in  strict  conformity  to  the 
law,  can  it  be  an  offence?  If  I  transgress,  is  not  the  law 
sufficiently  stringent  to  punish  me?  It  appears  from  the  letter 
of  your  Lordship  that  I,  if  present  at  a  public  meeting,  should 
be  answerable  for  language  uttered  by  others.  If  these  are  to 
be  the  terms  on  which  Her  Majesty’s  commission  of  the  peace 
are  to  be  holden,  take  it  back  again,  for  surely  none  but  the 
most  servile  of  men  would  hold  it  on  such  terms. 

Is  it  an  offence  to  be  appointed  a  delegate  to  convey  to  the 
constituted  authorities  the  petitions  of  the  people?  ...  I  was 
appointed  a  justice  of  the  peace  to  administer  the  laws  within 
the  borough  of  Newport.  Was  the  appointment  made,  that 
the  inhabitants  might  benefit  by  the  proper  exercise  of  the 
authority  intrusted  to  me?  Or  was  it  made  to  be  recalled  at 
the  will  of  your  Lordship,  although  the  inhabitants  might  be 
perfectly  satisfied  with  the  performance  of  the  duty?  Your 
Lordship  receives  a  very  large  sum  of  money  for  holding  the 
office  of  Secretary  of  State,  paid,  in  part,  out  of  the  taxes 
raised  on  the  inhabitants  of  the  borough.  Does  your  Lordship 
owe  them  no  duty?  For  what  is  your  Lordship  invested  with 
authority?  To  be  exercised  merely  at  the  caprice  of  your 
Lordship,  regardless  of  the  effects  that  may  follow?  I  have 
served  the  inhabitants  for  three  years,  zealously  and  gra¬ 
tuitously,  and  the  opinions  which  I  have  formed  as  to  the 
exercise  of  public  authority,  teach  me  that  they,  and  not  your 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[164 


Lordship,  ought  to  decide  whether  I  ought  to  be  struck  off 
the  commission  of  peace. 

Filling  an  humble  situation  in  life,  I  would  yield  neither  to 
your  Lordship,  nor  any  of  your  order,  in  a  desire  to  see  my 
country  powerful  and  prosperous.  Twenty  years’  reading  and 
experience  have  convinced  me  that  the  only  method  to  produce 
and  secure  that  state  of  things  is  a  restoration  of  the  ancient 
constitution.  Deeply  impressed  with  this  conviction,  I  have 
labored  to  obtain  the  end,  by  means  recognized  by  the  laws 
of  my  country — petition;  and  for  this  your  Lordship  thinks  I 
ought  to  be  stricken  off  the  commission  of  the  peace !  Violent 
and  inflammatory  language  indeed  !  I  am  convinced  that  in 
my  own  neighborhood,  my  attending  at  public  meetings  has 
tended  to  restrain  violent  language.  .  .  . 

Probably  your  Lordship  is  unaccustomed  to  language  of  this 
description ;  that,  my  Lord,  is  a  misfortune.  Much  of  evils  of 
life  proceed  from  the  want  of  sincerity  in  those  who  hold 
converse  with  men  in  authority.  Simple  men  like  those  best 
who  prophesy  smooth  things.  .  .  . 

The  Chartists  rejoiced  at  the  humiliation  which  Lord 

Russell  received  at  the  hands  of  one  of  their  leaders.  For 
'  • 
several  months  they  had  brooded  over  their  resentment 

against  the  Secretary  of  State,  not  so  much  on  account  of 
his  suppression  of  torch-light  meetings  as  on  account  of 
his  offer  of  arms  to  any  association  of  the  middle  class  that 
would  be  formed  ostensibly  for  the  protection  of  life  and 
property,  but  in  reality  for  putting  down  Chartist  assem¬ 
blies.  The  policy  of  Russell,  however,  was  rather  vacil¬ 
lating.  The  meeting  of  March  nth  at  the  Crown  and 
Anchor,  at  which  Frost  was  in  the  chair,  was  the  landmark 
for  both  the  terrorists  and  the  government.  The  systematic 
campaign  of  the  press  against  the  principles  of  the  Charter 
as  tending  to  robbery  and  destruction  of  society  was  turned 
with  effective  force  against  the  representatives  of  the  gov¬ 
ernment  who  were  charged  with  being,  in  their  cowardice. 


!65]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  !65 


abettors  of  sedition.  This  made  Lord  Russell  cast  aside 
the  painful  attitude  of  strained  indulgence,  on  the  one 
hand,  and  masqued  oppression,  on  the  other.  A  state  of 
open  hostility  now  established  itself  between  the  govern¬ 
ment  and  the  Chartists.  The  authorities  left  no  doubt  as 
to  their  determination  to  handle  the  situation  in  a  disciplin¬ 
ary  way.  Russell’s  order,  about  the  end  of  March,  to  strike 
the  name  of  Frost  from  the  Commission  of  Peace  for  at¬ 
tending  Chartist  meetings,  was  followed,  in  April,  by  the 
indictment  of  Stephens  and  the  declaration  that  the  Con¬ 
vention  was  an  illegal  body,  and,  in  May,  by  the  arrest  in 
London  of  Vincent  who  was  conveyed  to  Newport  and, 
together  with  several  other  Chartists,  committed  to  Mon¬ 
mouth  gaol.  The  Mayor  of  Newport  had  collected  evi¬ 
dence  against  the  young  orator  and  his  followers  in  the 
hope  that,  if  a  conviction  took  place,  Chartism  in  Mon¬ 
mouthshire  “  would  be  reckoned  among  the  things  that 
were.”  1  The  strength  of  the  movement  was,  however, 
greatly  underestimated.  Far  from  being  dismayed,  the 
Chartists  challenged  their  adversaries  on  more  than  one 
occasion. 

On  the  6th  of  May,  1839,  the  National  Petition,  con¬ 
taining  about  one  million  two  hundred  and  eighty-three 
thousand  signatures,  was  taken  to  the  residence  of  Thomas 
Attwood,  who  had  promised  to  present  it  to  Parliament. 
By  that  time,  however,  Attwood’ s  allegiance  to  the  Char-4 
tist  cause  underwent  a  marked  change.  It  may  have  been 
due  to  the  aggressive  policy  of  the  Convention  or  to  th 
fact  that  at  all  times  the  issue  of  paper  money  was  more 
important  to  him  than  the  People’s  Charter.  Be  it  as  it 
may,  he  gave  little  encouragement  to  the  delegation,  ex¬ 
pressing  his  doubt  whether,  on  account  of  the  expected 


1  Cf.  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire,  1840,  p.  18. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


1 66 


[166 


1 


resignation  of  Lord  Russell  from  the  ministry,  he  would 
be  able  to  present  the  Petition  in  the  near  future  and  re¬ 
fusing  to  move  for  leave  to  bring  in  a  bill  entitled  the  Peo¬ 
ple's  Charter. 

This  circumstance,  as  well  as  the  enmity  of  the  govern¬ 
ment,  made  the  leaders  realize  that  the  Charter  would  not 
“  be  the  law  of  the  land  in  less  than  a  month.”  The  Con¬ 
vention  carried  O’Connor’s  motion  to  adjourn  to  Birming¬ 
ham,  where  the  surroundings  were  thought  more  favorable 
because  of  the  general  excitement  which  prevailed  both  on 
account  of  the  conduct  of  the  local  authorities  in  suppress¬ 
ing  public  meetings  and  of  Lord  Russell’s  letter  to  the 
magistrates  offering  arms  to  the  middle  class.  On  the  13th 
of  May  the  Convention  was  welcomed  in  that  city  by  a 
vast  assemblage  and  resumed  its  sessions  in  a  buoyant 
spirit.  On  the  following  day,  after  some  discussion,  the 
Manifesto  of  the  General  Convention  of  the  Industrious 
Classes  was  adopted,  and  ten  thousand  copies  were  ordered 
to  be  printed  for  circulation. 

The  language  and  the  object  of  the  Manifesto  render  it 
the  most  remarkable  Chartist  document.  There  is  no  sign 
of  the  previous  overtures  to  the  middle  class,  and  due 
respect  is  paid  to  the  “  menaces  of  employers  ”  and  the 
“  power  of  wealth  ”.  The  distinct  class  interests  of  the 
working  men  and  women  are  put  in  the  foreground.  Be¬ 
ginning  with  the  declaration  that  “  the  government  of  Eng¬ 
land  is  a  despotism  and  her  industrious  millions  slaves  ” ; 
that  her  forms  of  “  justice  ”  are  subterfuges  for  legal 
plunder  and  class  domination;  that  the  “  right  of  the  sub¬ 
ject  ”  is  slavery,  without  the  slave’s  privilege,  and  that  the 
Whigs  and  the  Tories  are  united  in  their  despotic  deter¬ 
mination  to  maintain  their  power  and  supremacy  at  any 
risk,  the  Manifesto  continues : 


167]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  iGy 

Men  and  women  of  Britain,  will  you  tamely  submit  to  the 
insult?  Will  you  submit  to  the  incessant  toil  from  birth  to 
death,  to  give  in  tax  and  plunder  out  of  every  tzvelve  hours’ 
labor  the  proceeds  of  nine  hours  to  support  your  idle  and  in¬ 
solent  oppressors?  Will  you  much  longer  submit  to  see  the 
greatest  blessings  of  mechanical  art  converted  into  the  greatest 
curses  of  social  life? — to  see  children  forced  to  compete  with 
their  parents,  wives  with  their  husbands,  and  the  whole  of 
society  morally  and  physically  degraded  to  support  the  aris¬ 
tocracies  of  wealth  and  title?  Will  you  allow  your  wives  and 
daughters  to  be  degraded;  your  children  to  be  nursed  in 
misery,  stultified  by  toil,  and  to  become  the  victims  of  the  vice 
our  corrupt  institutions  have  engendered?  Will  you  permit 
the  stroke  of  affliction,  the  misfortunes  of  poverty,  and  the  in¬ 
firmities  of  age  to  be  branded  and  punished  as  crimes,  and 
give  our  selfish  oppressors  an  excuse  for  rending  asunder  man 
and  wife,  parent  and  child,  and  continue  passive  observers  till 
you  and  yours  become  the  victims? 

Perish  the  cowardly  feeling;  and  infamous  be  the  passive 
being  who  can  witness  his  country’s  degradation,  without  a 
struggle  to  prevent  or  a  determination  to  remove  it!  Rather, 
like  Sampson,  would  we  cling  to  the  pillars  which  sustain  our 
social  fabric,  and,  failing  to  base  it  upon  principles  of  justice, 
fall  victims  beneath  its  ruins.  Shall  it  be  said,  fellow-country¬ 
men,  that  four  millions  of  men,  capable  of  bearing  arms  and 
defending  their  country  against  every  foreign  assailant,  allowed 
a  few  domestic  oppressors  to  enslave  and  degrade  them?  That 
they  suffered  the  constitutional  right  of  possessing  arms,  to 
defend  the  constitutional  privileges  their  ancestors  bequeathed 
to  them,  to  be  disregarded  or  forgotten  till  one  after  another 
they  have  been  robbed  of  their  rights,  and  have  submitted  to 
be  awed  into  silence  by  the  bludgeons  of  policemen  ?  .  .  . 

Men  of  England,  Scotland,  and  Wales,  we  have  sworn  with 
your  aid  to  achieve  our  liberties  or  die!  And  in  this  resolve 
we  seek  to  save  our  country  from  a  fate  we  do  not  desire  to 
witness.  If  you  longer  continue  passive  slaves,  the  fate  of 
unhappy  Ireland  will  soon  be  yours,  and  that  of  Ireland  more 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


1 68 


[i  68 


degraded  still.  For,  be  assured,  the  joyful  hope  of  freedom 
which  now  inspires  the  millions,  if  not  speedily  realized,  will 
turn  into  wild  revenge.  The  sickening  thought  of  unrequited 
toil — their  cheerless  homes — their  stunted,  starving  offspring — 
the  pallid  partners  of  their  wretchedness  —  their  aged  parents 
pining  apart  in  a  workhouse — the  state  of  trade  presenting  to 
their  imaginations  no  brighter  prospect — these,  together  with 
the  petty  tyranny  that  daily  torments  them,  will  exasperate 
them  to  destroy  what  they  are  denied  the  enjoyment  of.  .  .  . 

Both  Whigs  and  Tories  are  seeking,  by  every  means  in  their 
power,  to  crush  our  peaceful  organization  in  favor  of  our 
Charter.  They  are  sending  their  miscreant  spies  to  urge  the 
people  into  madness ;  they  are  arming  the  rich  against  the 
poor,  and  against  his  fellow-man.  .  .  .  We  trust,  brethren, 
that  you  will  disappoint  their  malignity,  and  live  to  regain  our 
rights  by  other  means, — at  least,  we  trust  you  will  not  com¬ 
mence  the  conflict.  We  have  resolved  to  obtain  our  rights, 
“  peaceably  if  we  may,  forcibly  if  we  must  ” ;  but  woe  to  those 
who  begin  the  warfare  with  the  millions,  or  who  forcibly  re¬ 
strain  their  peaceful  agitation  for  justice — at  one  signal  they 
will  be  enlightened  to  their  error,  and  in  one  brief  contest  their 
power  will  be  destroyed.  .  .  . 


The  Chartists  were  called  upon  to  organize  simultaneous 
public  meetings  for  the  purpose  of  petitioning  the  Queen 
“  to  call  good  men  to  her  councils  ”,  and,  in  order  to  ascer¬ 
tain  “  the  opinions  and  determination  of  the  people  in  the 
shortest  possible  time  ”,  a  series  of  questions,  or  “  ulterior 
measures  ”,  was  to  be  submitted  at  each  meeting.  Remind¬ 
ing  the  Chartists  that  the  motto  of  the  Convention  was 
Union ,  Prudence  and  Energy ,  and  assuring  them  that  after 
ascertaining  the  expression  of  organized  public  opinion 
that  body  will  immediately  proceed  to  carry  the  will  of  the 
people  into  execution,  the  time  for  the  simultaneous  meet¬ 
ings  was  limited  to  the  ist  of  July. 

The  “  ulterior  measures  ”  proposed  by  the  Manifesto  and 


l6g]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  ^9 

subsequently  submitted  to  the  consideration  of  the  simul¬ 
taneous  assemblies  were  as  follows : 

1 .  Whether  they  will  be  prepared,  at  the  request  of  the  Con¬ 
vention,  to  withdraw  all  sums  of  money  they  may  individually 
or  collectively  have  placed  in  savings'  banks,  private  banks,  or 
in  the  hands  of  any  person  hostile  to  their  just  rights? 

2.  Whether,  at  the  same  request,  they  will  be  prepared  im¬ 
mediately  to  convert  all  their  paper  money  into  gold  and  silver? 

3.  Whether,  if  the  Convention  shall  determine  that  a  sacred 
month  will  be  necessary  to  prepare  the  millions  to  secure  the 
charter  of  their  political  salvation,  they  will  firmly  resolve  to 
abstain  from  their  labors  during  that  period,  as  well  as  from 
the  use  of  all  intoxicating  drinks? 

4.  Whether,  according  to  their  old  constitutional  right — a 
right  which  modem  legislation  would  fain  annihilate  —  they 
have  prepared  themselves  with  the  arms  of  freemen  to  defend 
the  laws  and  constitutional  privileges  their  ancestors  bequeathed 
to  them  ? 

5.  Whether  they  will  provide  themselves  with  Chartist  can¬ 
didates,  so  as  to  be  prepared  to  propose  them  for  their  repre¬ 
sentatives  at  the  next  general  election;  and  if  returned  by  show 
of  hands  such  candidates  to  consider  themselves  veritable  rep¬ 
resentatives  of  the  people — to  meet  in  London  at  a  time  here¬ 
after  to  be  determined  on  ? 

6.  Whether  they  will  resolve  to  deal  exclusively  with  Char¬ 
tists,  and  in  all  cases  of  persecution  rally  around  and  protect 
all  those  who  may  suffer  in  their  righteous  cause  ? 

7.  Whether  by  all  and  every  means  in  their  power  they  will 
perseveringly  contend  for  the  great  objects  of  the  People’s 
Charter,  and  resolve  that  no  counter  agitation  for  a  less  meas¬ 
ure  of  justice  shall  divert  them  from  their  righteous  object? 

8.  Whether  the  people  will  determine  to  obey  all  the  just 
and  constitutional  requests  of  the  majority  of  the  Convention? 

The  “  ulterior  measures  ”  did  not  satisfy  all  the  mem¬ 
bers  of  the  Convention.  They  were  concocted  as  a  compro- 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


iyo 


[170 


mise  program  by  the  various  factions.  One  can  easily  dis¬ 
cern  the  influence  of  Attwood’s  followers  in  the  first  three 
“  measures  The  abstinence  proposal  was  denounced  by 
Harney  and  his  friends  as  savoring  of  humbug,  believing 
as  they  did  that  nothing  but  the  extremest  measures  would 
be  of  any  value.  The  radicals  carried  their  recommenda¬ 
tions  to  ascertain  whether  the  people  were  ready  to  resist 
the  authorities  and  to  take  matters  in  their  hands,  to  elect 
and  seat  their  own  candidates,1 2  to  boycott  opponents  by 
dealing  exclusively  with  Chartists,  and  to  protect  all  who 
may  suffer  in  the  cause.  Lovett,  who,  as  secretary  of  the 
Convention,  signed  the  Manifesto *  confesses  that  he  “  did 
an  act  of  folly  in  being  a  party  to  some  of  its  provisions  ”, 
but  extenuates  this  “  folly  ”,  as  it  was  committed  for  the 
sake  of  union  and  for  the  love  and  hope  he  had  in  the 
cause.3 

While  the  Manifesto  counseled  not  to  “  commence  the 
conflict”,  the  London  Democrat  was  untiring  in  its  cam¬ 
paign  for  insurrection  as  a  “  primary  measure  ”,  Terror 
'  was  advocated  as  the  only  means  by  which  the  “  aristocratic 
and  shopocratic  factions  ”  could  be  induced  to  do  justice  to 
the  people.  The  idea  of  a  “  bloodless  triumph  ”  was  dis¬ 
pensed  with  as  mere  “  chatter  and  nonsense  ”,  as  the  “  ven¬ 
geance  of  blood  is  the  only  means  of  striking  terror  to  the 
hearts  of  tyrants,  especially  the  relentless  tyrants  of  Eng¬ 
land — the  callous-hearted  money-mongers.” 


It  won’t  be  the  organised  masses  that  will  carry  the  victory. 
Oh,  no!  That  depends  upon  the  poor,  outcast,  friendless 
beings  who  have  no  home  to  go  to,  no  food  to  satisfy  the 


1  Cf.  supra,  p.  159. 

2  The  Manifesto  was  signed  on  behalf  of  the  Convention  by  Hugh 
Craig,  Chairman,  and  William  Lovett,  Secretary. 

3  Cf.  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  208-9. 


iyi]  PETITION ,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT 

cravings  of  hunger,  no  covering  to  keep  them  warm,  or  even 
to  make  them  look  decent,  no  wherewithal  to  render  their 
lives  worth  preserving.  The  battle  .  .  .  will  be  fought  and 
won  by  those  whom  poverty  and  degradation  have  rendered 
outcasts  from  society — by  those  who  hide  themselves  from  the 
gaze  of  the  world,  through  the  cruel  operation  of  unjust  and 
partially-executed  laws.  The  battle  will  be  fought  and  won 
by  the  brigands,  as  they  are  called.  As  for  premature  out¬ 
breaks,  indeed,  a  great  deal  of  stuff  and  nonsense  has  been 
rung  in  the  ears  of  the  people  concerning  popular  commotions. 
Is  the  present  movement  a  real  one?  If  it  is,  then  too  many 
outbreaks  cannot  take  place.  Premature  outbreaks,  as  they 
are  called,  are  only  fatal  to  sham  movements;  but,  at  a  time 
like  this,  the  more  the  better.  .  .  .  What  are  outbreaks?  Are 
they  not  ebullitions  of  popular  feeling?  Then  if  numerous 
outbreaks  take  place,  does  it  not  prove  that  the  people  are 
ready  ?  Then,  hurrah  for  a  leader !  Hurrah  for  the  man  who 
has  the  energy  and  courage  to  unfurl  the  banner  of  freedom 
and  lead  the  people  on  to  victory  or  death.  .  .  .  Government 
looks  upon  all  parties  in  the  Chartist  ranks  alike.  Neither 
party  can  find  favor  in  the  eyes  of  exclusive  legislators.  Sham 
radicals,  timid  radicals,  trading  radicals,  as  well  as  honest  and 
determined  democrats,  will  all  alike  be  persecuted  and  crushed 
if  “  the  step  ”  be  not  now  taken  —  if  the  blow  be  not  now 
struck.  ...  We  are  all  embarked  in  the  same  vessel,  and  a 
shipwreck  would  be  as  fatal  to  the  one  party  as  the  other. 
Let  honest  men  then  unite,  and  the  victory  is  safe,  sure  and 
speedy.1 

The  relations  of  mutual  distrust  between  the  government 
and  the  Chartists  became  ever  more  pronounced.  Alarmed 
at  the  enthusiastic  reception  which  the  Birmingham  peo¬ 
ple  accorded  the  Convention,  the  government  complied  with 
the  request  of  the  local  authorities  and  sent  a  number  of 

1  The  London  Democrat,  May  18,  1839.  Cf.  also  issues  of  May  25, 

et  seq. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


1J2 


[1 72 


the  London  police  force  to  that  city.  This,  in  its  turn, 
created  ill-feeling  in  the  assembly,  and  it  was  due  primarily 
to  the  timely  warnings  of  O’Connor  and  Bronterre  not  to 
carry  arms  to  the  meetings  that  the  “  People’s  Parliament  ” 
was  saved  from  police  intervention. 

On  the  17th  of  May  the  Convention  adjourned  to  the 
1st  of  July  after  having  passed  Bronterre’s  resolutions :  1st, 
That  peace,  law,  and  order  shall  continue  to  be  the  motto 
of  the  Convention,  so  long  as  the  “  oppressors  ”  will  act 
in  the  same  spirit  towards  the  people;  otherwise,  it  shall 
be  deemed  a  sacred  duty  of  the  people  “  to  meet  force  with 
force  and  repel  assassination  by  justifiable  homicide  2nd, 
That  the  Chartists  who  may  attend  the  simultaneous  meet¬ 
ings  shall  avoid  carrying  offensive  weapons  about  their  per¬ 
sons  and  treat  as  enemies  of  the  cause  any  person  who  may 
exhibit  such  weapons,  or  who  “  by  any  other  act  of  folly 
or  wickedness,  should  provoke  a  breach  of  the  peace  ” ; 
3rd,  That  the  officers  who  may  have  charge  of  the  arrange¬ 
ments  for  the  simultaneous  meetings  shall  in  all  cases  con¬ 
sult  with  the  local  authorities;  and  4th,  That  should  the 
authorities  be  instigated  by  the  “  oppressors  in  the  upper 
and  middle  ranks  ”  to  assail  the  people  with  armed  force, 
the  “  oppressors  ”  would  be  held  responsible,  “  in  person 
and  property,  for  any  detriment  that  may  result  to  the 
people  from  such  atrocious  instigation  ”. 

The  simultaneous  meetings  were  held  in  a  great  number 
of  cities,  towns,  and  villages  with  distinct  success.  Conser¬ 
vative  estimates  of  the  assemblies  at  some  places  were  in 
the  hundreds  of  thousands.  Thus  the  demonstration  at 
Kersall  Moor  was  reported  to  have  been  made  up  of  not 
less  than  three  hundred  thousand;  at  West  Riding  of  two 
hundred  thousand;  at  Glasgow  of  one  hundred  and  thirty 
thousand,  and  at  Newcastle-on-Tyne  of  one  hundred  thou¬ 
sand  persons.  The  meetings  were  addressed  by  members 


!73]  PETITION,  CONVENTION  AND  GOVERNMENT  jy^ 

of  the  Convention,  including  O’Connor,  Bronterre,  Har¬ 
ney,  Frost,  and  other  Chartist  celebrities.  In  several  in¬ 
stances  the  demonstrations  were  held  in  defiance  of  the 
authorities,  who  not  only  refused  the  requests  of  the  ar¬ 
rangement  committees  to  convene  the  meetings,  but  caused 
proclamations  to  be  posted  warning  the  people  against  at¬ 
tending  illegal  gatherings.  Everything  went  off  peace¬ 
ably,  although  the  speakers  were  by  no  means  timid  in  the 
expression  of  their  sentiments.  At  the  West  Riding  demon¬ 
stration,  O’Connor  declared  that  if  the  “tyrants”  attempted 
to  put  down  the  meeting  by  force,  the  people  should  repel 
attack  by  attack.  Bronterre  did  not  mince  words  at  any  of 
the  meetings,  always  impressing  the  people  with  the  neces¬ 
sity  of  being  prepared  to  do  something  effective  for  uni¬ 
versal  suffrage.  He  upbraided  the  people  for  supporting 
“  the  whole  tribe  of  landholders,  fundholders,  and  two 
millions  of  menials  and  kept  mistresses,  together  with  one 
hundred  thousand  prostitutes  in  London  alone  ”.  The 
speeches  by  the  other  agitators  were  in  similar  vein. 

The  Convention  reassembled  at  Birmingham  on  the  ist 
of  July  and  immediately  took  up  the  question  of  adjourn¬ 
ing  to  London,  as  the  Birmingham  authorities  were  evi¬ 
dently  determined  to  interfere  with  its  business,  having- 
sworn  in  three  hundred  special  constables  that  very  day. 
Another  reason  for  the  removal  was  the  alleged  precarious 
condition  of  the  Bank  of  England,  which  made  it  strategi¬ 
cally  advisable  for  the  Convention  to  be  in  close  touch 
with  the  situation  in  order  to  avail  itself  of  the  embarrass¬ 
ment  on  the  part  of  the  government.  On  the  next  day, 
after  a  long  discussion,  it  was  agreed  that  the  sessions  be 
removed  to  London  on  the  ioth  of  that  month. 

The  reports  of  the  delegates  on  the  results  of  the  simul¬ 
taneous  meetings  showed  that,  notwithstanding  the  popular 
enthusiasm  for  the  Charter,  the  “  ulterior  measures  ”  were 


174 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[174 

not  approved  en  bloc  by  the  people.  The  “  sacred  month  ” 
proposition  met  with  decided  opposition  in  all  parts  of  the 
country.  There  seemed  to  be  diversity  of  opinion  on  this 
question  even  among  the  leaders.  In  spite  of  that,  how¬ 
ever,  unanimous  resolutions  were  adopted  approving  ex¬ 
clusive  dealing  with  Chartists,  a  run  on  the  banks,  absolute 
abstinence  from  excisable  drinks,  and,  in  view  of  the  ex¬ 
pected  division  on  the  National  Petition  which  was  to  take 
place  in  Parliament  on  the  12th  of  July,  it  was  decided  that 
the  members  of  the  Convention  meet  on  the  13th,  “  for 
the  purpose  of  appointing  a  day  when  the  sacred  month 
shall  commence,  if  the  Charter  has  not  previously  become 
the  law  of  the  land  ”. 


CHAPTER  XI 


The  Wrestling  Forces 

Though  tyrants  and  minions  rej  ect  our  prayer. 
And  sneer  at  the  evils  we  patiently  bear, 

And  laugh  us  to  scorn  when  we  humbly  ask, — 
How  soon  they  may  have  another  task! 

At  last  a  smothered  fire  forth  may  break, 

And  a  nation  in  knowledge  of  freedom  awake. 

— Alfred  Owen  Fennell. 

The  simultaneous  meetings  and  the  subsequent  adoption 
by  the  Convention  of  the  “  ulterior  measures  ”  were  fol¬ 
lowed  by  a  new  series  of  events,  in  which  both  the  Chartists 
and  the  government  displayed  a  mood  to  fight  to  the  bitter 
end,  and  which  culminated  in  temporary  victory  for  the 
latter. 

The  first  serious  encounter  between  the  people  and  the 
authorities  took  place  on  the  4th  of  July,  1839,  at  Birming¬ 
ham.  Since  the  days  of  the  agitation  for  the  Reform  Bill, 
the  people  had  been  accustomed  to  assemble  in  vast  multi¬ 
tudes  in  the  Bull  Ring,  where  they  not  only  aired  their 
grievances  but  also  listened  to  the  reading  of  newspapers 
and  discussed  political  events.  The  simultaneous  meetings 
struck  terror  to  the  hearts  of  the  middle  class,  and  the 
mayor  undertook  to  restrain  the  masses  from  holding  public 
meetings  in  the  city,  and  particularly  in  the  popular  Ring. 
The  resentment  of  the  workingmen  against  this  infringe¬ 
ment  upon  their  rights  was  on  a  par  with  their  hostility 
towards  the  newly-introduced  metropolitan  police.  Never¬ 
theless,  no  open  conflict  occurred  until  the  mayor  attempted 
to  enforce  his  proclamation.  On  the  evening  stated,  a  squad 
175]  175 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[176 


of  the  metropolitan  police,  headed  by  the  mayor  and  a 
magistrate  and  supported  by  several  detachments  of  dra¬ 
goons,  invaded  the  Ring  where  an  assembly  of  workingmen 
listened  to  the  reading  of  a  newspaper,  and,  without  any 
provocation  on  the  part  of  the  people,  commenced  an  indis¬ 
criminate  attack.  In  the  confusion,  men,  women,  and  chil¬ 
dren  were  thrown  down  and  trampled  upon,  the  police 
belaboring  them  right  and  left.  One  man  had  his  teeth 
knocked  out,  and  several  were  carried  away  with  broken 
heads  and  arms  and  other  severe  injuries.  After  the  first 
moments  of  panic,  the  people  rallied  their  strength  and 
compelled  the  police  to  flee.  But  the  latter  soon  returned, 
reinforced,  and  renewed  the  attack.  The  mayor  then  read 
the  Riot  Act,  ordered  the  dragoons  to  disperse  the  crowds, 
and  placed  military  guards  at  all  the  avenues  leading  to  the 
Bull  Ring  in  order  to*  prevent  any  new  gathering  there. 
The  fight  lasted  from  nine  to  half-past  ten  in  the  evening. 
About  midnight  the  dispersed  crowds  gathered  again,  sing¬ 
ing  the  Chartist  anthem,  “  Fall,  Tyrants,  Fall,”  and  amidst 
deafening  cheers  proceeded  for  Holloway  Head,  in  the  out¬ 
skirts  of  the  city,  where  they  swore  vengeance  against  the 
assailants.  They  then  marched  to  St.  Thomas’s  Church, 
where  they  tore  down  about  seventy  feet  of  railing  and 
turned  it  into  weapons.  A  rush  to  the  scene  of  the  con¬ 
flict,  which  might  have  proven  fatal  to  many,  was  averted 
by  two  popular  members  of  the  Convention,  Dr.  Taylor 
and  McDouall,  who  induced  the  incensed  people  to  throw 
down  their  improvised  arms. 

A  spirit  of  terror  and  vengeance  pervaded  the  city,  the 
fury  of  the  people  clashing  with  the  severity  of  the  author¬ 
ities.  About  six  o’clock  the  following  morning,  Dr.  Tay¬ 
lor,  together  with  ten  other  Chartists,  was  committed  to 
Warwick  jail.  It  goes  without  saying  that  the  “  People’s 
Parliament  ”  deemed  it  its  duty  to  express  indignation  over 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


1 77 


177] 

the  conduct  of  the  authorities,  and  the  following  resolu¬ 
tions  were  adopted  and  ordered  to  be  placarded  on  the  walls 
of  the  city : 1 

1.  That  this  Convention  is  of  opinion  that  a  wanton, 
flagrant,  and  unjust  outrage  has  been  made  upon  the  people  of 
Birmingham,  by  a  blood-thirsty  and  unconstitutional  force 
from  London,  acting  under  the  authority  of  men,  who,  when 
out  of  office,  sanctioned  and  took  part  in  the  meetings  of  the 
people;  and  now,  when  they  share  in  the  public  plunder,  seek 
to  keep  the  people  in  social  and  political  degradation. 

2.  That  the  people  of  Birmingham  are  the  best  judges  of 
their  own  right  to  meet  in  the  Bull  Ring  or  elsewhere;  have 
their  own  feelings  to  consult  respecting  outrage  given,  and  are 
the  best  judges  of  their  own  power  and  resources  to  obtain 
justice. 

3.  That  the  summary  and  despotic  arrest  of  Dr.  Taylor, 
our  respected  colleague,  affords  another  convincing  proof  of 
all  absence  of  justice  in  England,  and  clearly  shows  that  there 
is  no  security  for  lives,  liberty,  or  property,  till  the  people  have 
some  control  over  the  laws  they  are  called  upon  to  obey. 

No  sooner  had  the  resolutions  been  posted  about  the  town 
than  the  printer  was  arrested.  He  was,  however,  liberated 
immediately  after  naming  John  Collins,  a  Birmingham  local 
preacher  and  a  member  of  the  Convention,  as  the  person 
who  had  ordered  the  printing.  Lovett,  who,  as  secretary, 
had  signed  the  resolutions,  and  Collins  were  speedily 
arrested  and  brought  up  for  examination.  Both  refused 
tO'  incriminate  any  other  person  and  were  committed  for 
trial  at  the  next  assizes.  Pending  the  production  of  un¬ 
usually  high  bail  of  £1000  each,  they  were  kept  for  nine 
days  in  the  county  jail  of  Warwick,  the  magistrates  rais- 

1  See  The  Trial  of  William  Lovett  for  a  Seditious  Libel ,  London,  2d 
edition.  Cf.  also  Hansard,  op.  cit .,  vol.  xlix,  1839,  pp.  109-10,  and  pp. 
375-6. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[I78 


in g  every  possible  objection  to  the  bail  offered,  and  were 
subjected  to  the  discipline  and  indignities  of  convicted 
felons.1 

The  ire  of  the  masses  was  intensified  by  the  proclamation 
of  martial  law  and  the  conduct  of  the  police,  who  paraded 
the  streets  and  dealt  brutally  with  every  person  that  aroused 
their  suspicion.  Far  from  'intimidating  the  workingmen, 
the  wholesale  arrests  provoked  utmost  defiance.  Instigated 
by  advocates  of  physical  force,2  large  crowds  met  daily  at 
Holloway  Head  and  other  places,  serious  collisions  with 
the  police  and  military  forces  resulting.  The  desultory 
fights  continued  for  a  whole  week,  and  culminated  in  the 
second  Bull  Ring  riot  on  the  15th  of  July.  A  number  of 
houses  belonging  to  men  who  had  made  themselves  obnox¬ 
ious  to  the  masses  were  set  afire.  In  their  fury,  the  people 
entered  shops,  carried  the  goods  to  the  Bull  Ring,  and  com¬ 
mitted  them  to  the  devouring  flames.  The  police  and  the 
military  were  utterly  helpless.  But  not  for  a  minute  did 
the  rioters  forget  the  real  object  of  their  revolt. 

Amid  all  these  desperate  proceedings, — Gammage  testifies, — 
the  people  exhibited  a  disinterestedness  worthy  of  all  imita¬ 
tion.  Not  even  the  most  costly  goods  for  a  moment  tempted 
their  cupidity.  They  even  trod  under  foot  the  splendid  silver 
plate  of  Mr.  Horton,  proving  that,  however  great  their  pro¬ 
vocation,  plunder  was  not  their  object.  They  were  at  war 
with  the  ruling  classes,  but  they  scorned  to  avail  themselves 
of  the  common  privileges  of  warriors.  That  they  had  become 
desperate  was  not  their  fault;  their  vices  belonged  to  their 

1  Referring  to  these  indignities,  Lord  Brougham  stated  and  reiterated 
in  the  House  of  Lords  that  the  facts  were  verified  “by  a  most  re¬ 
spectable  individual,  whose  cross-examination  he  would  trust  as  much 
as  that  of  any  man  not  connected  with  the  legal  profession.”  See  Han¬ 
sard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xlix,  pp.  438-9  and  984-5. 

2  Holyoake  writes  that  he  saw  Harney  “daily  in  the  riot-week  stand¬ 
ing  at  the  door  openly.”  See  Holyoake,  op.  cit.,  vol.  i,  p.  85. 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


179] 


179 


oppressors,  their  virtues  were  their  own.  Meetings  continued 
to  be  held,  to  which  the  people  flocked  in  crowds.  The  process 
of  trade  was  stopped,  and  a  large  number  of  gentry  fled  the 
town ;  even  the  valiant  mayor  was  terrified  into  flight.1 


The  conduct  of  the  metropolitan  police  and  the  conse¬ 
quent  riots  in  Birmingham  were  the  objects  of  parliamen¬ 
tary  enquiries  in  both  Houses,2  in  which  the  government 
was  severely  criticized.  The  physical-force  agitators  also 
did  their  best  to  kindle  the  passions  of  the  people.  Public 
meetings  were  held  in  a  large  number  of  cities,  and  hundreds 
of  resolutions  were  adopted  and  printed  in  the  Chartist 
papers,  charging  the  authorities  with  high  treason  to  the 
Constitution.  The  Northampton  resolution  threatened  the 
Whig  government  that  it  would  “  be  held  responsible  for 
the  consequences,  even  if  the  suffering  people  .  .  .  should 
leave  at  midnight  their  miserable  homes  in  a  blaze,  and  the 
destructive  element  communicating  with  everything  around, 
reduce  to  one  common  ruin  and  desolation  the  mansions  of 
the  rich  and  the  hovels  of  the  poor.”  3 

In  the  meantime,  amidst  these  disquieting  circumstances, 
the  Parliamentary  battle  for  the  National  Petition  was  lost 
by  Attwood  and  his  supporters.4  On  the  12th  of  July,  Att- 
wood  brought  forward  his  motion  that  the  House  resolve 
itself  into  a  committee  for  considering  the  prayer  of  the 
National  Petition  which  he  had  presented  on  the  14th  of 
June.  The  anticipation  of  pungent  discussion  attracted 
large  crowds.  According  to  Disraeli,  “  the  Tories,  suppos¬ 
ing  Chartism  would  be  only  a  squabble  between  the  Whigs 
and  Radicals,  were  all  away,  while  the  ministerial  benches 


1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  135. 

2  See  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xlix,  pp.  109-m,  410-411  and  441-442. 

3  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  138. 

4  See  Hansard,  op.  cit.,  vol.  xlix,  pp.  220-256. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


180 


[180 


were  crowded — all  the  ministers,  all  the  Whigs,  and  all  the 
Radicals  ”  in  their  seats.1 

True  to  himself,  Attwood  expounded  the  Petition  from 
the  point  of  view  not  only  of  the  working  class,  but  also  of 
the  merchants,  manufacturers,  tradesmen  and  farmers.  He 
based  his  appeal  on  ancient  practice  of  common  justice  and 
humanity,  as  well  as  actual  grounds  of  utility.  Alluding  to 
the  petitioners  as  the  elite  of  the  working  class,  he  cautioned 
the  House,  however,  not  to  treat  the  prayer  as  representing 
the  sentiments  merely  of  that  class,  for  he  was  certain  that 
the  feelings  of  nine  out  of  every  ten  persons  of  the  middle 
class  were  in  full  accord  with  the  objects  of  the  Petition. 
There  was,  no  doubt,  “  some  property  ”  left  in  England, 
but,  generally  speaking,  the  merchant  and  the  manufacturer, 
being  on  the  brink  of  bankruptcy,  were  not  less  discontented 
than  the  laborers.  The  people  were  desirous  of  a  change, 
and  nothing  would  satisfy  them  but  some  large  and  gen¬ 
erous  measure.  This  measure  was  proposed  in  the  People’s 
Charter.  He  had  always  deprecated  violence,  but  he  con¬ 
sidered  it  his  duty  to  tell  the  House  that  “  if  the  hands  of 
the  people  were  not  to  be  set  free  from  their  trammels,  if 
they  were  not  to  have  the  benefit  of  earning  their  bread  by 
the  sweat  of  their  brow,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  were 
compelled  to  beg  for  labor  and  then  to  be  denied  bread, — it 
was  his  rooted  conviction  that  the  people  of  England  would 
not  submit  to  it  and  that  there  was  no  army  in  the  world 
capable  of  putting  them  down.” 

The  philanthropic  but  characterless  speech  of  Attwood 
made  the  reply  of  his  principal  opponent,  Lord  Russell,  ap¬ 
pear  far  more  convincing.  As  the  Lord  viewed  the  matter, 
the  whole  movement  had  been  promoted  by  persons  who 
had  been  going  through  the  country  and,  in  the  most  revo- 


1  See  Lord  Beaconsfield’s  Correspondence  with  his  Sister ,  1832-1852, 
edited  by  Ralph  Disraeli,  2d  edition,  1886,  p.  132. 


1 8 1  ]  THE  WRESTLING  FORCES  1 8 1 

lutionary  language,  “  not  exceeded  in  violence  and  atrocity- 
in  the  worst  times  of  the  French  Revolution,”  exhorted 
the  people  to  subvert  the  laws  by  force  of  arms.  Having 
scored  on  this  point  of  fact  which  no  one  could  deny,  but 
offering  no  explanation  for  the  generous  welcome  which  the 
people  had  accorded  those  agitators,  he  proceeded  to  de¬ 
molish  the  fundamental  principle  of  the  Charter.  He 
scorned  the  idea  that  universal  suffrage  or  any  legal  pro¬ 
vision  relating  to  representation  would  establish  general 
welfare  “  in  a  country  depending  very  much  upon  com¬ 
merce  and  manufactures  ”  and  prevent  that  state  of  low 
wages  and  consequent  distress  which  occur  in  every  com¬ 
munity  of  that  kind.  Even  the  United  States,  where  the 
people  enjoyed  universal  suffrage,  had  not  been  altogether 
free  from  alternate  fluctuations  from  prosperity  to  distress, 
notwithstanding  the  immense  tracts  of  wild  fertile  land  in 
which  the  population  that  could  not  subsist  in  towns  might 
easily  find  refuge  and  a  mode  of  living.  He  denied  that 
the  Petition  which  had  only  about  one  million  two  hundred 
thousand  signatures  was  a  national  petition  and  that  it  rep¬ 
resented  the  sentiments  and  opinions  of  a  majority  of  the 
people.  On  the  contrary,  the  great  majority  of  the  nation, 
including  the  working  class,  would  be  alarmed  at  the  pros¬ 
pect  of  having  the  principles  of  the  Charter  enacted  into 
law.  He  further  referred  to  the  increase  of  small  deposits 
in  savings’  banks  as  proving  the  absolute  want  of  truth  in 
the  statement  of  the  Petition  that  the  home  of  the  arti¬ 
ficer  was  desolate  and  the  manufactory  deserted.  He 
did  not  deny  that  there  were  many  industrious  and  sober 
workingmen  whose  means  were  exceedingly  scanty  and 
whose  situation  could  not  be  looked  upon  without  com¬ 
miseration.  But  he  was  utterly  relentless  in  showing  up 
the  “  complete  delusion  ”  of  those  who  believed  that  the 
adoption  of  universal  suffrage  would  place  the  laborers  in 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


182 


[182 


a  state  of  prosperity.  Referring  to  Attwood’s  pet  theory 
that  the  alteration  in  the  standard  of  value  and  an  increase 
in  the  quantity  of  paper  money  would  assure  general  pros¬ 
perity,  the  speaker  did  not  fail  to  point  out,  not  without 
ill-concealed  sarcasm,  that  the  Chartist  leaders  and  members 
of  the  General  Convention  had  denounced  the  influence  of 
paper  money  as  one  of  the  most  abominable  weapons  in  the 
hands  of  their  oppressors.  He  stated  and  reiterated  his 
opinion  that  the  Petition  contained  the  exhortations  chiefly 
of  “  very  designing  and  insidious  persons,  wishing  not  the 
prosperity  of  the  people,”  but  seeking  to  arouse  discord  and 
confusion,  “  to  produce  a  degree  of  misery,  the  consequence 
of  which  would  be  to  create  a  great  alarm  that  would  be 
fatal,  not  only  to  the  constitution  as  it  now  exists,  not  only 
to  those  rights  which  are  now  said  to  be  monopolized  by  a 
particular  class,  but  fatal  to  any  established  government.” 

Disraeli  put  it  remarkably  well  when  in  the  course  of  his 
retort  to  Russell  he  remarked  that  “  the  noble  Lord  had 
answered  the  speech  of  the  honorable  member  for  Birming¬ 
ham,  but  he  had  not  answered  the  Chartists.”  It  was  his 
opinion  that  Attwood  had  made  a  very  dexterous  speech  “  in 
favor  of  the  middle  classes,”  but  that  actual  facts  led  to  a 
very  different  conclusion.  He  found  among  the  Chartists 
the  greatest  hostility  to  the  middle  classes.  Stanch  Tory 
that  he  was,  he  discovered  that  the  people  “  complained  only 
of  the  government  by  the  middle  classes.  They  made  no 
attack  on  the  aristocracy  —  none  on  the  Corn  Laws  —  but 
upon  the  newly-enfranchised  constituency,  not  on  the  old — 
upon  that  peculiar  constituency  which  was  the  basis  of  the 
noble  Lord’s  government.”  Not  committing  himself  on  the 
real  issues  of  the  Charter,  he  called  to  account  the  Minister 
of  the  Crown  for  his  nonchalant  attitude  towards  the  “  re¬ 
markable  social  movement  ”  and  for  despising  the  one  mil¬ 
lion  two  hundred  and  eighty  thousand  fellow-subjects  who 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


183] 


had  signed  the  Petition  because  of  their  discontent  with  the 
existing  conditions.  He  saw  “  social  insurrection  ”  at  the 
very  threshold,  and,  much  as  he  disapproved  of  the  Char¬ 
ter,  he  sympathized  with  the  Chartists,  who  formed  a  great 
body  of  his  countrymen  and  who  labored  under  great 
grievances.1 

The  debate,  in  which  several  other  members  participated, 
concluded  with  the  division  of  forty-eight  votes  in  favor 
as  over  against  two  hundred  and  thirty-seven  in  opposition 
to  Attwood’s  motion. 

This  division  greatly  disheartened  the  Chartist  leaders. 
The  Convention,  which  had  reconvened  in  London  on  the 
10th  of  July,  fully  realized  how  serious  a  blow  the  cause  had 
received,  as  well  as  its  own  impotence  which  resulted  from 
the  arrest  and  resignation  of  many  of  its  members.  On  the 
day  after  the  defeat  of  Attwood’s  motion,  being  of  the 
opinion  that  it  was  utterly  useless  to  expect  anything  from 
the  House  by  way  of  petitioning,  and  that  the  people  would 
not  get  liberty  until  they  took  it,  the  question  of  a  general 
strike,  or  a  sacred  month ,  was  again  brought  up  for  con¬ 
sideration.  After  lengthy  discussions,  a  resolution  was 
finally  passed  on  the  16th  that  it  was  the  opinion  of  the 
Convention  “  that  the  people  should  work  no  longer  after 
the  1 2th  of  August  next,  unless  the  power  of  voting  for 
members  of  parliament,  to  protect  their  labor,  is  guaran¬ 
teed  to  them.”  This  resolution  was,  however,  subsequently 
rescinded  on  the  motion  of  Bronterre,  who  stated  that  strict 
enquiries  of  the  leaders  in  various  districts  had  convinced 
him  that  the  people  were  not  prepared  to  carry  out  a  gen¬ 
eral  strike.  Letters  to  the  same  effect  were  also  read  from 
Frost  and  other  leaders.  The  painful  consciousness  of  lack 


1  Disraeli  himself  called  this  “  a  capital  speech  ”  and  seemed  to  have 
taken  pride  in  the  fact  that  the  Whig  government  did  not  like  it.  See 
the  same  letter  quoted  above. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[184 


of  authority  on  the  part  of  the  Convention  was  revealed  in 
the  following  resolution  which  was  introduced  by  Bronterre 
and  carried  by  a  vote  of  twelve  against  six,  the  remaining 
seven  members  present  refusing  to  commit  themselves : 1 

That  while  the  Convention  continues  to  be  unanimously  of 
opinion  that  nothing  short  of  a  general  strike,  or  suspension 
of  labor  throughout  the  country,  will  ever  suffice  to  re-estab¬ 
lish  the  rights  and  liberties  of  the  industrious  classes,  we  never¬ 
theless  cannot  take  upon  ourselves  the  responsibility  of  dictat¬ 
ing  the  time  or  circumstances  of  such  strike,  believing  that  we 
are  incompetent  to  do  so  for  the  following  reasons: 

1st:  Because  our  numbers  have  been  greatly  reduced  by  the 
desertion,  absence,  and  arbitrary  arrests  of  a  large  portion  of 
our  members. 

2nd:  Because  great  diversity  of  opinion  prevails  amongst 
the  remaining  members,  as  to  the  practicability  of  a  general 
strike,  in  the  present  state  of  trade  in  the  manufacturing 
districts. 

3rd :  Because  a  similar  diversity  of  opinion  seems  to  prevail 
out  of  doors,  amongst  our  constituents  and  the  working  classes 
generally. 

4th:  Because,  under  these  circumstances,  it  is  more  than 
doubtful  whether  an  order  from  the  Convention  for  a  general 
holiday  would  not  be  a  failure. 

5th :  Because,  while  we  firmly  believe  that  an  universal 
strike  would  prove  the  salvation  of  the  country,  we  are  at  the 
same  time  equally  convinced  that  a  partial  strike  would  only 
entail  the  bitterest  privations  and  sufferings  on  all  parties  who 
take  part  in  it,  and,  in  the  present  exasperated  state  of  public 
feeling,  not  improbably  lead  to  confusion  and  anarchy. 

6th:  Because,  although  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Convention  to 
participate  in  all  the  people’s  dangers,  it  is  no  part  of  our  duty 
to  create  danger  unnecessarily,  either  for  ourselves  or  others. 


1  Gammage,  op.  cit.,  p.  146. 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


185] 


To  create  it  for  ourselves  would  be  folly — to  create  it  for 
others  would  be  a  crime. 

7th :  Because  we  believe  that  the  people  themselves  are  the 
only  fit  judges  of  their  right  and  readiness  to  strike  work,  as 
also  of  their  own  resources  and  capabilities  of  meeting  the 
emergencies  which  such  an  event  would  entail.  Under  these 
circumstances,  we  decide  that  a  committee  of  three  be  ap¬ 
pointed  to  reconsider  the  vote  of  the  16th  instant,  and  to  sub¬ 
stitute  for  it  an  address,  which  shall  leave  to  the  people  them¬ 
selves  to  decide  whether  they  will  or  will  not  commence  the 
sacred  month  on  the  12th  of  August,  at  the  same  time  explain¬ 
ing  the  reasons  for  adopting  such  a  course,  and  pledging  the 
Convention  to  co-operate  with  the  people  in  whatever  measures 
they  may  deem  necessary  to  their  safety  and  emancipation. 


The  committee  provided  for  in  the  resolution  was  ex¬ 
tended  to  five  members,  and  included  Bronterre  and  O’Con¬ 
nor.  The  evidence  collected  with  reference  to  the  expedi¬ 
ency  oT  a  general  strike  convinced  them  that  such  a  step 
would  be  fatal  to  the  movement,  and  they  unanimously 
recommended  the  abandonment  of  the  project  of  a  sacred 
month.  On  the  6th  of  August  a  resolution  to  the  same 
effect,  moved  by  Bronterre  and  seconded  by  O’Connor,  was 
accordingly  passed  by  the  General  Council  of  the  Con¬ 
vention,  recommending  at  the  same  time  the  cessation  of 
work  for  two  or  three  days  “  in  order  to  devote  the  whole 
of  that  time  to  solemn  processions  and  solemn  meetings.” 
The  resolution  embodied  a  strong  appeal  to  all  the  trades 
to  cooperate  as  united  bodies  in  making  a  grand  national 
moral  demonstration  on  the  12th  of  August,  as  otherwise 
“  it  will  be  impossible  to  save  the  country  from  a  revolu¬ 
tion  of  blood,  which  after  enormous  sacrifices  of  life  and 
property  will  terminate  in  the  utter  subjection  of  the  work¬ 
ing  people  to  the  monied  murderers  of  society.” 

The  lack  of  organization  and  centralized  leadership  was 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


1 86 


[186 


keenly  felt  at  this  critical  period,  and  the  “  national  holi¬ 
day  ”  turned  out  a  complete  fiasco,  causing  some  disturb¬ 
ances  in  several  towns,  but  generally  unobserved  throughout 
the  country.  Its  original  self-confidence  and  aggressiveness 
having  disappeared,  the  Convention  could  hardly  expect  to 
have  its  mandates  respected  by  the  Chartists  at  large.  The 
“  People’s  Parliament  ”  thus  lost  its  raison  d'etre.  Bron- 
terre’s  motion  on  the  6th  of  September  for  the  dissolution  of 
the  body,  however,  met  stringent  opposition,  and  the  mem¬ 
bers  being  equally  divided — eleven  against  eleven — it  was 
carried  only  by  the  deciding  vote  of  the  chairman.  The 
division  was  by  no  means  on  party  lines,  some  of  the  ex¬ 
treme  revolutionists  voting  with  the  most  devoted  followers 
of  Lovett. 

The  dissolution  of  the  Convention  came  at  a  time  when 
the  government  policy  of  persecution  and  terror  had  as¬ 
sumed  unparalleled  proportions.  Hundreds  of  Chartists 
had  been  arrested  and  tried  for  sedition,  and  no  relaxation 
was  in  view.  Severe  sentences  were  imposed  on  national 
and  local  leaders,  in  accordance  with  the  theory  of  the 
Attorney-General  that  there  was  danger  in  allowing  those 
men  of  talent  to  be  at  large.  The  government  first  showed 
its  mettle  on  the  5th  and  6th  of  August,  at  the  trial  of 
Lovett  and  Collins  for  seditious  libel.  The  attack  on  the 
Bull  Ring  assembly  had  been  made,  as  Lovett  said  in  his 
defence,  “  the  subject  of  reprehension  and  censure  from 
one  extremity  of  the  kingdom  to  another.”  The  public  en¬ 
quiry  of  the  Town  Council  of  Birmingham  showed  that  the 
universal  condemnation  was  well  founded.  In  its  resolu¬ 
tion  the  Council  used  practically  the  same  terms  for  which 
Lovett  and  Collins  were  tried.  The  enquiry  “  proved  that 
a  brutal  and  bloody  attack  had  been  made  upon  the  people 
of  Birmingham,  and  that  it  was  their  opinion  that  if  the 
police  had  not  attacked  the  people,  no  disorder  would  have 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


187] 


occurred,  and  they  considered  the  riot  was  incited  by  the 
London  police.”  1 

Notwithstanding  these  facts,  the  Government  did  its 
utmost  to  convict  Lovett  and  his  colleague,  ostensibly  for 
the  resolutions  on  the  Bull-Ring  outrage  but  in  reality  for 
the  role  which  these  victims  had  played  in  the  General  Con¬ 
vention.  The  prosecutor  dwelt  at  length  on  the  document 
which  Lovett  had  signed  by  order  of  the  Convention  “with 
all  the  form  and  solemnity  of  a  proclamation  by  Her  Maj¬ 
esty  Queen  Victoria,”  and  said  bluntly  that  “  the  Attorney- 
General  would  have  neglected  his  duty  if  he  had  not  selected 
for  prosecution  Mr.  Lovett,  who  was  a  man  of  very  con¬ 
siderable  powers.  He  was  a  man  who,  if  he  willed  to  do  ill, 
had  the  capacity  to  do  it.”  2  The  men  selected  to  serve  on 
the  jury  were  decidedly  hostile  to  the  defendants,  two  of 
them  having  previously  avowed  their  conviction  that  “  all 
Chartists  ought  to  be  hanged.”  The  objection  of  Lovett 
to  those  men  was  of  no  avail.  Collins  was  defended  by 
Sergeant  Goulburn,  a  prominent  Tory,  who  saw  in  his  task, 
as  he  expressed  it,  “  a  glorious  opportunity  of  having  a 
slap  at  the  Whigs.”  Lovett  conducted  his  own  defence, 
disregarding  the  adage  quoted  to  him  by  his  friends  that 
“  he  who  defends  himself  has  a  fool  for  his  client.”  He 
delivered  a  masterly  address  to  the  jury  in  a  manner  which 
strongly  contrasted  with  the  political  speech  of  the  profes¬ 
sional  advocate  Goulburn.  Surveying  the  history  and  the 
causes  that  had  led  to  the  Chartist  movement,  he  asserted 
in  a  dignified  and  convincing  way  the  constitutional  right 
of  public  meetings,  of  free  discussion,  and  of  public  peti¬ 
tioning.  The  Chartist  movement,  as  all  other  movements 
in  favor  of  the  oppressed,  necessarily  occasioned  great  un- 


1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  p.  220. 

2  The  Trial  of  William  Lovett  for  a  Seditious  Libel,  2d  edition,  Lon¬ 
don,  pp.  5  and  19. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


1 88 


[188 


easiness  among  those  who'  would  be  deprived  of  unjust 
power  and  corrupt  privilege.  Far  greater  culpability  was 
on  the  side  of  those  who  instigated  the  Bull  Ring  disorder 
than  on  the  part  of  the  people  who  merely  repulsed  the  fla¬ 
grant  and  unconstitutional  attack.  The  resolutions  which 
he  had  signed  were  perfectly  justified  by  the  circumstances. 
He  refuted  the  charge  of  criminal  intention  on  his  part, 
and  quoted  many  authorities,  political  and  legal,  to  substan¬ 
tiate  his  arguments  as  to  the  lack  of  guilt  from  a  technical, 
as  well  as  from  a  moral,  point  of  view.  In  its  comments 
on  the  trial,  the  Morning  Chronicle  of  August  8,  1839,  said : 


The  speeches  of  Mr.  Sergeant  Goulburn,  in  defence  of  John 
Collins,  and  William  Lovett  in  his  own  defence,  present  an 
edifying  contrast  of  tone  and  temper — of  taste  and  judgment. 
The  learned  sergeant’s  argument,  had  he  made  it  out,  could 
have  little  profited  his  client,  or  served  the  ends  of  justice. 
Had  that  of  Mr.  Lovett  been  better  supported  by  facts,  it  must 
have  secured  his  acquittal.  The  one  is  a  misplaced  ebullition 
of  party  virulence;  the  other  a  temporate  and  talented  plead¬ 
ing,  which  elicited  strong  commendation  from  the  counsel  for 
the  prosecution.  And  yet  the  one  of  these  men,  independently 
of  his  professional  standing,  was  long  deemed  one  of  the 
principal  supporters  of  his  party  in  the  House  of  Commons, 
while  the  other  has  not  even  a  voice  in  the  election  of  a  repre¬ 
sentative  to  sit  in  that  House.  Is  it  strange  that  Mr.  Lovett 
should  be  a  discontented  man?  We  condemn  the  language  for 
which  he  has  been  convicted;  we  should  also  condemn  him 
were  he  satisfied  to  belong  to  what  Mr.  Hume  emphatically 
calls  the  “  slave  class.”  His  defence  at  least  demonstrates 
his  qualification  for  the  franchise. 


Lovett’s  appeal  for  a  favorable  verdict  was  an  impas¬ 
sioned  plea  for  the  rights  of  man.  But  it  fell  on  deaf  ears. 
It  took  the  jury  but  two  or  three  minutes  of  deliberation  to 
return  a  verdict  of  “  guilty,”  and  the  defendants  were  each 


THE  WRESTLING  FORCES 


189] 


sentenced  to  twelve  months’  imprisonment.  This  singular 
victory  of  the  government  prosecutor  was  followed  by  a 
number  of  others.  The  prediction  of  the  terrorists  came 
true,  and  the  authorities  looked  “  upon  all  parties  in  the 
Chartist  ranks  alike.”  Adherents  of  either  wing  were 
seized  and  punished  severely  for  most  trivial  offences. 
Even  Stephens,  who  at  his  trial,  00  the  15th  of  August,  re¬ 
pudiated  all  radicalism,  was  sentenced  to  imprisonment  for 
a  period  of  eighteen  months.  Four  Chartists  were  sen¬ 
tenced  to  death  for  participation  in  the  Bull  Ring  outbreak, 
and  it  was  only  after  strong  representations  to  the  govern¬ 
ment  that  their  punishment  was  commuted  to  transporta¬ 
tion  for  life.  Within  a  very  short  period  there  was  hardly 
a  leader  who  was  not  committed  to  jail  or  not  bound  to 
appear  for  trial. 

The  breaking-up  of  the  Convention  did  not  in  the  least 
affect  the  mood  of  the  ardent  supporters  of  the  Charter. 
Public  meetings  and  open  demonstrations  gave  place  to 
more  dangerous  vehicles  of  agitation  within  narrow  circles 
of  revengeful  conspirators.  The  ill-feeling  of  the  work¬ 
ingmen  grew  ever  more  ominous  because  of  the  inexorable 
rigor  and  discipline  to  which  the  Chartist  prisoners  were 
subjected.  Lovett  and  Collins,  the  least  offensive  of  the 
agitators,  soon  found  out  that  it  was  impossible  for  them 
to  preserve  their  health  on  the  kind  of  food  allowed  to  them 
and  begged,  but  in  vain,  to  be  permitted  to  purchase  a  little 
tea,  sugar  and  butter,  and  occasionally  a  small  quantity  of 
meat.  The  magistrates  also  refused  to  allow  them,  without 
specific  authority  from  the  Secretary  of  State,  the  use  of 
writing  materials  and  books.  Petitions  and  memorials  in 
their  favor  were  presented  by  the  Working  Men’s  Associa¬ 
tion,  the  people  of  Birmingham,  Francis  Place,  and  mem¬ 
bers  of  Parliament.  But,  as  Lovett  states,  whenever  the 
magistrates  were  applied  to  for  any  little  mitigation  of  their 


190 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[190 

severities,  “  they  invariably  contended  that  they  had  no 
power  without  the  sanction  of  the  Secretary  of  State;  and 
when  he  was  memorialized,  he  referred  us  to  the  visiting 
magistrates,”  1  Other  Chartists,  without  the  powerful  in¬ 
fluence  exerted  on  behalf  of  Lovett  and  his  colleague,  were 
entirely  at  the  mercy  of  the  wrathful  prison  authorities, 
and  some  of  the  victims  subsequently  died  in  jail  from  dis¬ 
eases  contracted  there. 

The  policy  of  retaliation  pursued  by  the  government 
towards  the  Chartist  prisoners  caused  particular  resentment 
in  the  case  of  Henry  Vincent,  the  idol  of  the  Welsh  miners, 
who  was  tried  on  the  2d  of  August,  and  sentenced  to  im¬ 
prisonment  in  Monmouth  county  jail  for  a  period  of  twelve 
months.  The  open  hostility  of  the  jury,  one  of  whom  had 
been  heard  to  declare  that  he  would  give  nine-pence  to  buy 
a  halter  for  hanging  the  defendant  without  judge  or  jury, 
and  the  severe  punishment,  caused  much  acrimony  against 
the  authorities.  The  treatment  of  the  prisoner  like  a  com¬ 
mon  felon  still  more  irritated  his  admirers.  Frost  himself, 
on  the  28th  of  September,  wrote  to  a  former  colleague,  a 
magistrate  of  the  county,  exhorting  him  to  obtain  a  miti¬ 
gation  of  Vincent’s  treatment.  All  remonstrances  and  pro¬ 
tests,  however,  were  of  no  avail.  It  was  then  that  the 
Welsh  Chartists  conceived  the  idea  of  releasing  Vincent  by 
force  and  began  to  perfect  plans  which  culminated  in  the 
Newport  Riot  of  November  4,  1839,  when  thousands  of 
men  “  rushed  like  a  torrent  from  the  hills,”  armed  with  the 
gun,  the  pike,  and  the  bludgeon,  “  to  lay  in  ruins  the  com¬ 
mercial  emporium  of  their  county.” 


1  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  229-231. 


CHAPTER  XII 


The  Newport  Riot 

The  stories  of  the  events  leading  to  the  Welsh  rising 
are  utterly  conflicting.  The  biographer  of  John  Frost  de¬ 
nies  the  existence  of  any  previous  plan  of  organization : 

Those  who  have  said  that  Mr.  Frost  was  long  engaged  in 
organizing  the  people  for  the  Newport  outbreak,  must  here¬ 
after  hold  their  peace,  or  be  content  to  have  attached  to  them 
the  imputation  of  uttering  against  a  man  who  has  it  not  in 
power  to  defend  himself,  an  injurious  allegation,  which  there 
exists  no  evidence  to  establish  .  .  .  The  gathering  on  the  eve 
of  the  riots  had  no  direct  object  laid  down ,  and  that,  until  a 
very  few  hours  previous  to  their  meeting,  the  assembly  was 
not  even  agreed  upon.1 

Lovett,  on  the  other  hand,  gives  what  seems  to  be  a 
more  authentic  account,  obtained  “  from  a  person  who  took 
an  active  part  in  matters  pertaining  to  it.”  It  appears  that, 
having  failed  in  his  endeavors  on  behalf  of  Vincent,  Frost 
came  to  London  and  confided  to  two  or  three  members  of 
the  Convention  his  great  difficulty  in  restraining  the  Welsh 
Chartists  from  attempting  to  release  the  prisoner  by  force. 
One  of  the  conferees  then  gave  assurance  that  if  the  Welsh 
effected  a  rising  in  favor  of  Vincent,  the  people  of  York¬ 
shire  and  Lancashire  would  join  in  a  rising  for  the  Charter. 
The  parties  decided  not  to'  take  any  steps  before  consulting 
the  local  leaders  in  their  respective  districts.  Shortly  after¬ 
wards  a  meeting  was  held  at  Heckmondwick  which  was 

1  The  Life  of  John  Frost ,  Esq.,  London,  1840,  p.  7. 

191]  191 


192 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[192 

attended  by  about  forty  delegates,  including  three  members 
of  the  Convention,  and  which  expressed  a  determination  to 
aid  the  intended  rising  in  Wales  by  a  simultaneous  outbreak 
in  the  North.  O’Connor  was  requested  by  a  special  York¬ 
shire  delegate  to  lead  them,  and  was  apparently  mis¬ 
understood  by  the  latter,  who  reported  the  leader’s  readi¬ 
ness  to  head  the  rising.  Finding  that  the  people  were  in 
earnest,  he  immediately  sent  one  representative  to  York¬ 
shire  and  Lancashire  and  another  to  Wales  to  caution  the 
leaders  against  the  rising.  When  found  by  O’Connor’s 
envoy,  Frost  informed  him  that  the  message  came  too  late, 
that  the  people  were  resolved  on  releasing  Vincent  from 
prison,  and  that  he  might  as  well  blow  his  own  brains  out 
as  try  to  oppose  them  or  shrink  back.  He  urged  him  to  go 
back  to  the  North  and  inform  the  leaders  of  the  Welsh 
preparations.  The  riot,  however,  was  precipitated  before 
any  outside  aid  could  be  rendered.1 

The  activities  of  Frost  before  the  outbreak  in  no  way 
tended  to  allay  the  spirit  of  strife.  His  last  public 
letter,  dated  at  Newport,  October  22,  1839,  and  addressed 
to  the  farmers  and  tradesmen  of  Monmouthshire,  assumes 
particular  significance  in  the  light  of  the  subsequent  tragic 
insurrection.  Assuring  his  “  fellow-countrymen  ”  that,  un¬ 
less  the  Charter  be  speedily  enacted,  “  there  will  be  no 
security  for  person  or  property,”  the  author  seeks  to  im¬ 
press  the  people  with  the  realization  of  the  cause  of  such 
unsafety : 

In  all  countries,  where  great  discontent  has  existed,  there 

1  Cf.  Lovett,  op.  cit.,  pp.  239-241.  In  his  enmity  towards  O’Connor, 
Lovett  never  fails  to  impeach  the  conduct  and  motives  of  the  latter. 
In  this  case,  he  insinuates  that  O’Connor  misleadingly  induced  ‘‘the 
poor  fellow,”  the  Yorkshire  delegate,  to  believe  that  he  would  head  the 
insurrection,  as  well  as  that  he  “  set  about  to  render  the  outbreak  in¬ 
effectual.” 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


193 


193] 

always  must  have  been  a  cause,  and  that  cause  always  was  the 
oppression  and  cruelty  of  men  in  authority.  What  is  it  which 
has  rendered  the  laboring  classes  of  this  country  so  discon¬ 
tented?  What  has  produced  that  deep  and  powerful  feeling 
which  a  spark  would  now  ignite  from  one  end  of  the  country 
to  the  other?  A  deep  sense  of  wrong — a  thorough  convic¬ 
tion  of  the  injustice  with  which  they  are  treated.  Their  labor 
is  taken  from  them  by  the  means  of  the  law ;  it  is  given  to  a 
set  of  idle  and  dissolute  men  and  women;  those  who  produce 
not,  are  clothed  in  purple  and  fine  linen,  and  fare  sumptuously 
every  day,  while  the  laborer  is  fed  with  the  crumbs  which  fall 
from  the  table  of  the  rich.  The  working-men  have  petitioned 
for  justice;  their  petitions  were  treated  with  contempt,  and 
their  leaders  imprisoned  and  treated  with  greater  severity  than 
felons ;  they  ask  for  a  reduction  of  taxation,  and  the  answer 
is,  a  rural  police. 

The  proceedings  of  the  last  Quarter  Sessions,  are  well 
worthy  your  serious  attention.  One  oppressive  act  follows 
the  other.  Sometime  ago  we  had  a  Poor-law  Amendment  Act, 
by  which  the  management  of  your  own  money  was  completely 
taken  out  of  your  own  hands,  and  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
landlords.  Here’s  a  pretty  law,  by  which  poverty  is  made  a 
crime  and  punished  by  confinement,  by  a  separation  of  man 
and  wife,  and  parent  and  child.  To  support  this  oppressive 
law  we  are  now  to  have  a  rural  police! — armed  men  all  over 
the  country — to  suppress  discontent  by  force,  and  the  murmur- 
ings  of  poverty  by  the  bludgeon!  And  this,  too,  in  England 
— in  the  land  formerly  of  freedom — in  the  land  in  which,  at  one 
time,  the  constable’s  staff,  and  the  sheriff’s  wand,  were  quite 
sufficient  to  preserve  peace.  .  .  . 

Suppose  the  farmers  and  tradesmen  were  to  ask  themselves 
how  is  this  likely  to  end?  It  must  produce  one  of  two  states 
of  things.  Every  year  will  add  to  the  oppression  and  poverty 
of  the  people.  Tyranny  has  no  cessation ;  every  desperate  act 
must  be  supported  by  one  more  violent,  the  preservation  of 
the  tyrants  renders  this  necessary.  We  are  fast  approaching 
the  state  of  France,  previously  to  the  first  revolution.  We 


194 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[194 

have  spies  watching  all  public  proceedings ;  every  word  will 
very  soon  be  weighed  in  the  balance  of  the  despot,  and  con¬ 
strued  at  the  will  of  those  in  authority.  This  will  produce 
a  sullen  discontent  which  will  be  evinced  in  a  way  to  render 
property  and  life  insecure.  This  will  be  a  pretty  state  of 
society  when  every  farmer  will  come  to  market  with  a  brace 
of  pistols  in  his  pocket — when  every  man  in  authority  will 
be  looking  for  an  enemy  in  every  one  he  meets.  This  is  no 
imaginary  picture,  it  will  be  a  state  of  society,  the  natural  ef¬ 
fects  of  taxation,  of  poverty,  of  misery,  and  of  crime. 

Look  at  the  other  side  of  the  picture ;  suppose  that  the 
working-men,  driven  to  despair,  should  follow  the  example 
of  our  own,  and  of  other,  countries.  Here  would  be  a  state 
of  suffering !  All  the  angry  passions  in  full  scope — resentment 
for  past  injuries,  hatred  public  and  private.  Where,  in  such  a 
case,  would  be  the  voice  that,  under  those  circumstances, 
would  be  listened  to?  The  French  people,  previously  to  the 
revolution,  were  led  by  some  of  the  most  benevolent  men  in 
the  world;  they  sought  for  a  change  in  the  most  oppressive 
laws  that  ever  existed.  The  government  fancied  that  if  it 
could  destroy  the  leaders,  that  all  would  be  well.  In  many 
instances  it  succeeded ;  and  what  was  the  consequence  ?  Lead¬ 
ers  ten  times  more  violent.  It  appears  to  be  the  opinion  of 
the  authorities  in  this  country,  that  if  they  could  imprison 
or  destroy  the  leaders  of  the  movement,  that  all  would  be  well. 
Never  was  there  a  greater  mistake.  Could  they  succeed,  they 
would  exchange  benevolent  men  for  cruel  ones.  Stopping  the 
movement  is  out  of  the  question,  unless  by  altering  a  system 
which  is  the  cause  of  all  the  evils  of  which  the  people  com¬ 
plain.1 

The  plan  of  the  Welsh  Chartists,  as  brought  out  at  the 
subsequent  trials,  was  to  have  the  members  of  the  various 
lodges  throughout  the  district  assemble,  fully  armed,  and 
then  march  towards  Newport  in  three  divisions.  A  copy  of 


1  The  English  Chartist  Circular ,  no.  27. 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


195 


195] 

the  directions  produced  at  the  magistrates’  examination? 
gave  the  details  of  the  scheme : 1 

Let  us  form  into  sections,  by  choosing  a  good  staunch  inde¬ 
pendent  brother  at  the  head  of  each  section;  that  is  to  say, 
each  section  to  be  composed  of  ten  men,  who  are  known  to 
him  to  be  sincere,  so  that  the  head  of  each  section  may  know 
his  men.  Thus  five  sections  will  comprise  55  men  and  offi¬ 
cers.  Then  these  five  officers — such  as  corporals — will  choose 
a  head  officer,  so  that  he  may  give  his  five  officers  notice;  so 
these  50  men  are  to  be  called  a  bye-name;  then  three  fifties 
will  compose  a  company,  and  the  three  officers  will  choose  a 
proper  person  to  command  the  165  in  company,  officers  and 
all,  such  as  a  captain.  Then  three  companies  will  compose  495 
men  and  officers,  which  officer  will  be  such  as  a  brigade-gen¬ 
eral.  So  three  brigades  will  choose  a  chief,  which  will  be 
1485  men  and  officers,  which  chief  officer  is  to  be  in  the 
style  of  a  conventional-general.  So  that  by  these  means  the 
signal  “  W.  R.”  can  be  given  in  two  hours’  notice,  within 
seven  miles,  by  the  head  officer  noticing  every  officer  under 
him,  until  it  comes  to  the  deacons  or  corporals  to  notice  their 
ten  men;  the  officers  to  have  bye-names — not  military  names. 

It  was  decided  that  the  first  division,  starting  from  Black¬ 
wood,  should  be  headed  by  Frost;  the  second,  composed  of 
men  from  Brynmawr  and  Ebbw  Vale,  should  leave  the 
latter  place  under  the  command  of  Zephaniah  Williams; 
while  the  third  division,  consisting  of  the  Chartists  from 
Blaenavon,  Abersychan,  and  neighboring  places,  should 
leave  Pontypool  under  the  leadership  of  William  Jones. 2 

1  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  November,  1839,  2d  edition,  1889, 
pp.  19-20. 

2  Zephaniah  Williams,  a  keeper  of  a  beerhouse  in  a  little  town  near 
Newport,  was  one  of  the  most  enthusiastic  followers  of  Vincent  and 
Frost,  and  during  the  Chartist  agitation  exercised  great  influence 
among  the  workingmen  of  his  district. 

William  Jones,  or  William  Lloyd  Jones,  as  he  designated  himself  in 
later  years,  was  the  illegitimate  son  of  a  tradesman  at  Bristol.  In  his 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[196 


The  three  divisions  were  directed  to  meet  on  Sunday,  No¬ 
vember  the  third,  at  midnight,  at  a  place  several  miles  from 
Newport.  Thence  they  would  march  into  the  town,  which 
would  be  reached  about  two  o’clock  in  the  morning,  attack 
the  troops  who  were  expected  to  be  caught  unprepared  in 
the  absence  of  any  suspicion  of  danger,  break  down  the 
bridge  across  the  Usk,  stop  the  mail-coaches  and  the  traffic, 
and  take  possession  of  the  town.  The  delay  of  the  mail  was 
to  be  a  signal  to1  Birmingham,  and  then  to>  the  whole  North, 
to  rise  in  arms. 

The  plan  was  carried  out  only  in  part.  On  the  Sunday 
preceding  the  attack,  all  villages  in  the  district  were  in  a 
state  of  mobilization,  and,  in  spite  of  the  heavy  rain,  men 
of  all  ages,  fathers  and  sons,  gathered  at  the  appointed 
places,  armed  with  weapons  of  every  description.  Those 
who  had  known  nothing  of  the  plot  were  struck  with 
terror  and  hid  themselves  in  the  recesses  of  their  dwellings 
or  in  the  neighboring  woods.  Many  houses  are  re¬ 
ported  to  have  been  searched,  and  men  dragged  from  bed 
and  forced  to  join  the  march.  The  center  of  all  action  was 
in  Blackwood,  where  the  commander-in-chief,  John  Frost, 
issued  orders  and  received  reports  from  his  subordinates. 
About  seven  o’clock  a  messenger  presented  himself  to  Frost, 
saying  that  he  had  come  from  Newport;  that  “  the  soldiers 
there  were  in  the  barracks;  that  they  were  all  Chartists; 
that  their  arms  and  ammunition  were  all  packed,  and  that 
they  were  all  ready  to  come  up  on  the  Hills,  only  they  were 
waiting  for  the  Chartists  to  go  down  to  fetch  them.”  1 


youth  he  gave  up  his  trade  of  watchmaker  and  became  a  strolling  actor. 
In  1833  he  was  made  the  manager  of  a  watchmaking  business  in  Ponty- 
pool,  and  then,  after  his  marriage,  started  the  same  business  on  his 
own  account.  His  attractive  personality  and  histrionic  talents  rendered 
him  a  commanding  figure  among  the  Pontypool  Chartists.  In  the 
movement  he  distinguished  himself  as  one  of  the  most  zealous  advo¬ 
cates  of  physical  force. 

1  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  p.  21. 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


197 


197] 

This  was  evidently  a  spurious  report.  As  a  matter  of 
fact,  the  news  had  by  that  time  reached  Newport  that  the 
Chartists  were  scouring  the  Hills  in  all  directions  and  gath¬ 
ering  great  forces.  The  mayor,  Thomas  Phillips,  imme¬ 
diately  summoned  five  hundred  special  constables  and 
stationed  them  in  various  places.  Messengers  and  scouts 
were  sent  out  in  all  directions  to  watch  and  report  the 
progress  of  the  Chartist  movements.  In  his  intense  alarm 
at  the  news  imparted  to  him  by  the  spies,  the  mayor  also 
despatched  a  request  to  Bristol  that  a  reinforcement  of 
troops  be  sent  at  once  to  Newport.  In  the  course  of  the 
evening  special  constables  paraded  the  streets  and  arrested 
all  suspicious  persons. 

The  severity  of  the  weather  and  the  incessant  torrents  of 
rain  during  the  whole  night  greatly  impeded  the  progress 
of  the  several  divisions,  which  more  than  once  had  to  seek 
shelter.  Thus  the  original  plan  of  invading  Newport  at 
night  was  completely  upset.  It  was  morning  when  the 
gathered  forces  reached  the  outskirts  of  the  town,  and  the 
news  of  their  approach  reached  the  mayor  in  time  for  him 
to  station  himself  with  a  military  detachment  and  fifty  con¬ 
stables  in  the  Westgate  Hotel,  where  a  number  of  prisoners 
taken  during  the  night  were  detained.  About  nine  o’clock 
the  head  of  the  Chartist  body,  under  the  command  of  Frost, 
appeared,  cheering  and  shouting,  at  the  gates  of  the  West- 
gate  Hotel.  The  men  were  armed  with  “  guns,  pistols, 
blunderbusses,  swords,  bayonets,  daggers,  pikes,  bill-hooks, 
reaping-hooks,  hatchets,  cleavers,  axes,  pitch-forks,  blades 
of  knives,  scythes  and  saws  fixed  in  staves,  pieces  of  iron 
two  and  three  yards  in  length,  sharpened  at  the  one  end,  blud¬ 
geons  of  various  length  and  size,  hand  and  sledge-hammers, 
mandrils — in  fact,  every  weapon  that  could  be  at  all  made 
available.”  1  The  leading  ranks  made  an  attempt  to  enter 


1  The  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire t  p.  4. 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[198 


the  stable-yard,  but  finding  the  gates  strongly  barred,  they 
proceeded  to  the  portico  of  the  Hotel.  One  of  the  leaders 
ascended  the  steps  and  demanded  the  surrender  of  the  pris¬ 
oners,  to  which  a  special  constable  replied,  “No,  never!” 
The  firing  of  the  first  gun,  however,  dissipated  the  courage 
of  the  constables,  who  were  armed  only  with  staves.  Most 
of  them  fled,  some  to  the  cellars,  some  to  the  roof,  and 
others  to  the  yard  and  other  places  of  security,  leaving  a 
few  of  their  wounded  comrades  to  the  mercy  of  the  in¬ 
vaders.  Within  a  few  moments  the  house  was  blockaded 
by  the  rebels,  who  fired  frequent  shots  through  the  broken 
windows  into  the  various  rooms  of  the  building.  It  was 
then  that  the  mayor,  slightly  wounded,  ordered  the  soldiers 
to1  use  their  guns.  The  well-aimed  volleys  soon  proved 
effective.  The  piercing  shrieks  of  scores  of  dying  and 
wounded  men  created  a  panic  which  destroyed  all  discipline 
in  the  rear  as  well  as  the  front  ranks.  The  rebel  army, 
variously  estimated  between  ten  and  twenty  thousand  men, 
recoiled  in  horror  before  a  mere  handful  of  defenders, 
scattering  their  weapons  and  even  their  garments  as  they 
scampered  away  in  all  directions.  After  ten  or  fifteen  min¬ 
utes  of  steady  and  deadly  firing  by  the  soldiers,  even  the 
most  reckless  conspirators  fled  from  the  place,  which  pre¬ 
sented  a  most  gruesome  sight : 


Many  who  suffered  in  the  fight,  crawled  away;  some  ex¬ 
hibiting  frightful  wounds,  and  glaring  eyes,  wildly  crying  for 
mercy,  and  seeking  a  shelter  from  the  charitable:  others,  de¬ 
sperately  maimed,  were  carried  in  the  arms  of  the  humane 
for  medical  aid;  and  a  few  of  the  miserable  objects  that  were 
helplessly  and  mortally  wounded,  continued  for  some  minutes 
to  writhe  in  torture,  crying  for  water,  and  presenting,  in  their 
gory  agonies,  a  dismal  and  impressive  example  to  any  of  the 
political  seducers,  or  the  seduced,  who  might  have  been  within 
view,  and  a  sickening  and  melancholy  spectacle  for  the  eye 
of  humanity.1 


1  The  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire,  p.  43. 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


199 


199] 

Inside  the  Westgate  five  dead  bodies  and  a  number  of 
severely  wounded  men  were  found  weltering  in  their  blood. 
One  man,  who  was  discovered  under  the  portico  of  the 
mayor’s  house,  where  he  had  crept,  after  receiving  a 
gun-shot  wound,  expired  exclaiming,  “  The  Charter  for 
ever!”  Altogether  twenty-two  bodies  were  gathered  and 
subsequently  interred  in  St.  Woolos  churchyard.  A  char¬ 
acteristic  expression  of  the  zealous  faith  in  the  cause  which 
impelled  the  actions  of  those  men  even  to  the  extent  of 
martyrdom  is  found  in  the  letter  which  one  of  the  victims, 
a  cabinetmaker  from  Pontypool,  a  youth  barely  nineteen 
years  of  age,  wrote  to  his  parents  on  the  eve  of  the  riot: 1 

Dear  Parents : 

I  hope  this  will  find  you  well,  as  I  am  myself  at  present.  I 
shall  this  night  be  engaged  in  a  struggle  for  freedom,  and 
should  it  please  God  to  spare  my  life,  I  shall  see  you  soon ;  but 
if  not,  grieve  not  for  me.  I  shall  fall  in  a  noble  cause.  My 
tools  are  at  Mr.  Cecil’s,  and  likewise  my  clothes. 

Yours  truly, 

George  Shell. 

In  the  consternation  that  followed  this  attack  the  author¬ 
ities  did  not  lose  time  in  taking  steps  to  bring  the  conspir¬ 
ators  to  justice.  A  reward  of  £100  was  offered  for  the 
capture  of  any  of  the  three  chief  commanders.  Frost  was 
taken  into  custody  before  the  close  of  the  evening.  When 
apprehended,  he  appeared  fatigued  and  depressed,  and  sur¬ 
rendered  without  protest.  He  handed  from  his  pockets 
three  new  pistols,  a  flask  nearly  full  of  powder  and  about 
fifty  bullets,  Jones  was  arrested  about  a  week  after  the 
attack,  and  Williams  eluded  capture  for  ten  days.  The 
three  leaders  and  ten  other  Chartists  were  committed,  and 
subsequently  indicted  for  high  treason,  while  about  thirty 


1  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  p.  45. 


200 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[200 

others  were  held  on  lesser  charges.  The  attitude  of  the 
government  left  1101  doubt  that  the  fate  of  the  principal 
actors  was  sealed.  On  the  9th  of  November,  the  mayor  of 
Newport  received  a  letter  from  the  Secretary  of  State  for 
the  Home  Department,  conveying  the  Queen’s  approval  of 
his  conduct,  and  this  expression  of  thanks  was  followed  on 
the  13th  with  an  offer  of  knighthood  for  the  mayor.  The 
several  constables  who  had  been  wounded  in  the  affray  were 
rewarded  with  pensions  of  £20  per  annum  each  for  life. 
Vincent’s  paper,  The  Western  Vindicator ,  which  had  a  large 
circulation  among  the  Welsh  workingmen,  was  seized  wher¬ 
ever  it  could  be  found,  and  was  suppressed  until  it  disap¬ 
peared.  The  Chartists,  on  the  other  hand,  took  up  the 
cause  of  the  prisoners  in  quite  a  practical  way.  A  conven¬ 
tion  represented  by  many  delegates  met  in  London  and 
decided  to  try  all  available  means  to  secure  a  favorable 
verdict  for  their  comrades,  and  the  appeals  for  funds  by 
the  defense  committees  throughout  the  country  received 
generous  response. 

The  Special  Commission,  which  was  headed  by  the  Lord 
Chief  Justice  Nicholas  Tindal,  opened  its  sittings  on  the 
10th  of  December,  1839,  the  Crown  Court  at  Monmouth. 
The  town  was  in  a  state  of  intense  excitement.  Constab¬ 
ulary  and  military  forces  were  stationed  near  and  within 
the  court-house,  and,  in  apprehension  of  all  possible  con¬ 
tingencies,  loop-holes  were  pierced  in  the  structure  in  such 
positions  as  to  enable  troops  to  fire  upon  any  person  ap¬ 
proaching.  The  Chief  Justice  charged  the  grand  jury  and 
defined  the  law  relating  to  high  treason.  The  next  day 
Frost  and  twelve  of  his  associates  were  placed  at  the  bar 
and  informed  that  a  true  bill  of  high  treason  had  been 
found  against  them  by  the  grand  jury.  The  indictment 
comprised  four  counts,  the  substance  of  the  charges  being 
that  the  defendants  had  broken  their  faith  and  true  alle- 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


201 


201  ] 

giance  to  the  Sovereign  and  levied  war  against  the  Queen 
within  her  realm  with  intent  to  compel  her  to  change  her 
measures.  The  trial  commenced  on  the  31st  of  December, 
when  the  prisoners  pleaded  “  not  guilty,”  and  resolved  to 
sever  in  their  challenges.  The  trial  of  Frost  came  first. 
Both  the  Attorney-General  and  the  counsel  for  the  defense 
contested  the  case  with  distinct  dexterity  and  resolve.  The 
effect  of  the  damaging  evidence  given  by  most  of  the  thirty- 
seven  witnesses  could  not,  however,  be  destroyed  by  the 
counsel,  and  on  the  8th  of  January,  1840,  after  half  an 
hour’s  deliberation,  the  jury  brought  in  a  verdict  of 
“  guilty,”  accompanied  by  a  recommendation  of  the  pris¬ 
oner  “  to  the  merciful  consideration  of  the  court.”  Zeph- 
aniah  Williams  was  put  on  trial  on  the  9th  of  January,  and 
on  the  13th  the  jury  relumed  a  verdict  of  “guilty”  with 
the  same  recommendation.  The  court  then  proceeded  with 
the  case  of  William  Jones,  and  an  identical  verdict  was  re¬ 
turned  on  the  15th  of  the  same  month.  On  the  following 
day  the  three  prisoners  were  brought  in  to  receive  sentence. 
Frost  appeared  calm  and  resigned;  Williams  was  ghastly 
pale  and  leaned  for  support  against  the  dock;  but  Jones 
remained  firm  and  dignified  to  the  very  last,  apparently  little 
impressed  by  the  solemn  import  with  which  the  Lord  Chief 
Justice,  holding  out  no  hope  of  mercy,  addressed  the  con¬ 
victed  Chartists.  The  latter  retained  their  equanimity  even 
after  the  sentence  had  been  pronounced  in  the  following 
appalling  words : 

That  you,  John  Frost,  and  you,  Zephaniah  Williams,  and 
you,  William  Jones,  be  taken  hence  to  the  place  from  whence 
you  came,  and  be  thence  drawn  on  a  hurdle  to  the  place  of 
execution,  and  that  each  of  you  be  there  hanged  by  the  neck 
until  you  be  dead;  and  that  afterwards  the  head  of  each  of 
you  shall  be  severed  from  his  body,  and  the  body  of  each, 
divided  into  four  quarters,  shall  be  disposed  of  as  her  Majesty 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


20  2 


[202 


shall  think  fit.  And  may  God  almighty  have  mercy  upon  your 
souls.1 


A  similar  sentence  was  subsequently  passed  upon  five 
other  rioters,  who  had  pleaded  guilty  to  the  charge  of  high 
treason,  on  the  understanding  that  their  lives  would  be 
spared.  The  Chief  Justice  accordingly  intimated  to  them 
that,  as  they  had  not  been  the  contrivers  of  the  treason, 
their  punishment  would  be  commuted  to  transportation  for 
life.  Of  the  other  prisoners,  eighteen  were  sentenced  to 
various  terms  of  hard  labor,  while  a  larger  number  were 
either  traversed  to  the  assizes  or  acquitted. 

The  news  of  the  conviction  of  the  Welsh  chieftains  was 
received  by  the  Chartists  with  an  ebullition  of  wrath.  Nu¬ 
merous  spontaneous  meetings  were  held  throughout  the 
country,  protesting  against  the  sentence  as  a  perversion  of 
justice  and  an  act  of  vengeance,  and  petitioning  both  Houses 
of  Parliament  to  save  the  lives  of  the  convicts.  Memorials 
praying  for  mercy  were  also'  presented  to  the  Queen.  The 
serious  outbreaks  in  Sheffield,  Bradford,  and  other  towns, 
threatened  to  spread  to  the  large  industrial  centers.  Rumors 
of  incendiarism  began  to  circulate  from  town  to  town.  The 
government,  however,  seemed  not  to1  waver  from  its  deter¬ 
mination  to  carry  out  the  sentence.  The  possibility  of  miti¬ 
gating  the  penalty  caused  Sir  John  Campbell,  the  Attorney- 
General,  keen  mental  anguish.  He  appeared  personally  to 
argue  against  the  validity  of  the  objection  which  had  been 
raised  at  the  trials  by  the  counsel  for  the  defense,  and  which 
the  Lord  Chief  Justice  had  submitted  for  consideration  to 
the  Court  of  Exchequer,  namely,  that  the  lists  of  witnesses 
and  the  jury  had  not  been  delivered  to  the  prisoners  in  pur¬ 
suance  of  the  Act  of  Parliament.  The  case  was  argued  by 
both  sides  on  the  25th,  27th  and  28th  of  January,  and  the 


1  The  Rise  and  Fall  of  Chartism  in  Monmouthshire,  p.  82. 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


203 


203] 

Court  decided  that  the  objection,  although  valid,  had  not 
been  taken  at  the  proper  time.  The  state  of  mind  of  Sir 
Campbell  is  revealed  in  the  following  remarks  which  he 
entered  in  his  diary  after  the  conclusion  of  the  trials :  1 

I  have  passed  a  very  anxious  day,  as  if  I  myself  had  been 
on  trial.  To  my  utter  astonishment  and  dismay,  Tindal 
summed  up  for  an  acquittal.  What  he  meant,  the  Lord  only 
knows.  No  human  being  doubted  the  guilt  of  the  accused, 
and  we  had  proved  it  by  the  clearest  evidence.  Chief  Justice 
Tindal  is  a  very  honorable  man,  and  had  no  assignable  reason 
for  deviating  from  the  right  course.  Yet  from  the  beginning 
to  the  end  of  his  charge,  he  labored  for  an  acquittal. 

The  execution  of  the  three  convicts  was  fixed  for  Satur¬ 
day,  February  1,  1840.  The  executioner,  the  heads-man, 
the  scaffold,  and  the  implements  of  death  were  kept  in 
readiness,  when  a  respite  for  the  prisoners  reached  Mon¬ 
mouth  on  the  30th  of  January.  This,  however,  inspired 
but  little  hope,  as  it  was  immediately  followed  by  an  official 
announcement  of  the  High  Sheriff  that  the  sentence  would 
be  carried  out  on  the  6th  of  February.  On  January  31st, 
Sir  Frederick  Pollock,  the  chief  counsel  for  Frost,  for  the 
sixth  time  headed  a  deputation  to  Lord  Melbourne  endeav¬ 
oring  to  prevail  on  him  to  mitigate  the  severity  of  the 
punishment.  The  Premier  remained  inflexible,  although  Sir 
Pollock  had  conveyed  to  him  the  urgent  personal  entreaty 
of  Lord  Brougham.  When  informed  of  the  result,  the 
latter  persuaded  Sir  Pollock  to  try  once  more.  The  seventh 
interview  proved  successful.  Rumors  had  it  that  in  this 
decision  the  government  gratified  the  personal  wishes  of 
the  Queen.  On  the  1st  of  February  a  respite  during  Her 
Majesty’s  pleasure  was  read  to  the  prisoners,  and  secret 
orders  were  given  to  the  governor  of  the  jail  to  be  pre- 


1  The  Chartist  Riots  at  Newport,  pp.  66-67. 


204 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[204 

pared  for  immediate  departure  with  the  convicts.  On  Sun¬ 
day  night,  the  2d  of  February,  Frost,  Williams  and  Jones 
were  removed  from  Monmouth  jail  and,  under  military 
escort,  conveyed  to  Chepstow  and  placed  on  a  steamer 
which  was  bound  for  Portsmouth.  All  efforts  to  save  the 
victims  from  banishment  proved  futile,  the  Secretary  of 
State  holding  that  he  could  not,  consistently  with  his  public 
duty,  advise  the  Queen  to  grant  the  prayers.  On  the  24th 
of  the  same  month  the  three  Welshmen,  together  with  two 
hundred  and  ten  other  prisoners,  embarked  in  a  convict  vessel 
at  Spithead,  destined  for  Van  Diemen’s  Land.  The  motion 
which  Representative  Leader  brought  forward  on  the  10th 
of  March,  for  an  address  to  the  Queen  praying  for  a  free 
pardon,  was  supported  only  by  seven  members.1 

While  the  doom  of  the  banished  leaders  continued  to  agi¬ 
tate  the  minds  of  the  Chartists,  sincere  sympathy  was  every¬ 
where  expressed  to  the  relatives  of  the  men  slain  at  the 
Westgate.  On  Sunday,  April  12,  1840,  the  graves  of  the 
victims  were  decorated  with  flowers  and  laurels,  sur¬ 
mounted  with  the  following  lines : 

May  the  rose  of  England  never  blow, 

The  Clyde  of  Scotland  cease  to  flow, 

The  harp  of  Ireland  never  play, 

Until  the  Chartists  gain  the  day. 

1  The  repeated  agitation  on  behalf  of  the  three  martyrs  finally  led  the 
government,  in  1854,  to  grant  them  conditional  pardons,  forbidding  re¬ 
turn  to  the  United  Kingdom.  Frost  went  to  the  United  States,  where  he 
resided  for  two  years.  The  numerous  memorials  from  Newport,  Shef¬ 
field,  and  other  towns,  finally  won  him  unconditional  pardon.  In 
August,  1856,  he  returned  to  Newport,  and  was  received  with  great 
enthusiasm.  The  Town  Council,  however,  refused  to  comply  with  his 
demand  to  have  his  name  restituted  in  the  list  of  freemen  of  the  bor¬ 
ough.  He  then  took  up  his  residence  at  Stapleton.  After  years  of 
seclusion,  he  died  on  the  28th  of  July,  1877. 

Williams,  who  had  become  a  wealthy  coal  owner,  died  on  the  8th  of 
May,  1874,  in  Tasmania. 

Jones  pursued  his  occupation  of  watchmaker  at  Launceston,  Austra¬ 
lia,  having  no  desire  to  go  elsewhere.  He  died  there  in  December,  1873. 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


205 


205] 

The  onslaught  of  the  government  was  not  confined  to 
Wales  alone.  The  prosecutions  of  the  Chartists  filled  the 
chronicles  of  well-nigh  every  town  in  the  United  Kingdom. 
The  outrages  of  the  police  and  the  spies  became  a  public 
nuisance.  One  after  another  the  active  men  in  the  move¬ 
ment  were  apprehended  and  convicted.  Most  of  the  leaders 
conducted  their  own  defense,  and  their  addresses  to  the 
jury,  some  of  them  lasting  five,  six  and  even  ten  hours,  be¬ 
came  a  singular  feature  at  these  trials.  Severe  penalties 
were  imposed  on  Bronterre,  O’Connor,  the  veteran  radical 
William  Benbow,  and  other  leaders,  and  all  were  subjected 
to  the  most  humiliating  treatment  by  the  prison  authorities. 

The  following  table  shows  the  distribution  of  the  Char¬ 
tist  prisoners  confined  for  various  terms  for  seditious  libel, 
for  riot,  for  attending  illegal  meetings,  for  possession  of 
arms,  and  other  political  offences,  from  January  1,  1839,  to 
June  1,  1840  r1 


Chartist  Convicts  in  England 
County.  Where  Confined. 


Number  of 
Convicts. 


Chester . County  Gaol . 

Durham  . .  County  Gaol . 

Kent . House  of  Correction,  Canterbury 

Lancaster . Lancaster  Castle . 


County  Gaol  and  House  of  Correction, 

Kirkdale  . 

House  of  Correction,  Preston  . 


Lincoln . Lincoln  Castle . 

Middlesex . House  of  Correction - 

Gaol  of  Newgate  . 

Westminster  Bridewell  . . 

Monmouth . County  Gaol . 

House  of  Correction,  Usk 


Northumberland.  .House  of  Correction,  Newcastle 


29 

3 

1 

5 

135 

3 

I 

14 

8 

13 

63 

4 
19 


1  Based  on  returns  to  an  order  of  the  House  of  Commons.  Cf.  The 
English  Chartist  Circular,  no.  1. 


206 


THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


[206 


Nottingham . County  Gaol . 

House  of  Correction,  Southwell  . . 

Somerset . County  Gaol,  Ilchester . 

Surrey . Queen’s  Bench  Prison  . 

Warwick . County  Gaol . 

Wilts . County  Gaol . 

House  of  Correction,  Devizes _ 

Worcester . Gaol  and  House  of  Correction  ... 

York . York  Castle  . 

East  Riding,  House  of  Correction 
North  Riding,  House  of  Correction 


West  Riding,  House  of  Correction 


23 

12 

3 

2 

28 

8 

1 

3 

69 

2 
12 
19 


Total  for  England . 480 

Chartist  Convicts  in  Wales 

County .  Where  Confined.  Number  of 

Convicts. 

Brecon . County  Gaol  and  House  of  Correction .  12 

Glamorgan . House  of  Correction,  Swansea .  1 

Montgomery  . Gaol  and  House  of  Correction .  50 


Total  for  Wales .  63 

Total  for  England  and  Wales .  543 


The  wholesale  arrests  and  the  ruthless  persecution  of  the 
Chartists  seemed  to  have  crushed  the  movement.  The 
Whig  press  had  apparent  cause  to  rejoice  at  the  govern¬ 
ment  victory.  The  excitement  caused  by  the  Newport  riot 
and  the  subsequent  trials  was  gradually  waning;  public 
meetings  became  less  frequent  and  less  aggressive,  and  a 
large  portion  of  the  Chartist  press  went  out  of  existence. 
There  were  all  the  symptoms  of  an  early  death  of  the  mon¬ 
ster  movement.  Yet  even  then  all  but  those  blinded  with 
conceit  and  self-delusion  could  see  the  new  weapons  that 
were  being  forged  by  the  workingmen  against  their  enemies. 
Carlyle  voiced  the  truth  when  he  said  that  it  was  the  “  chi¬ 
mera  of  Chartism  ”  and  not  the  reality  that  was  put 


THE  NEWPORT  RIOT 


207 


207] 

down.1  The  causes  of  discontent  remaining  unhampered, 
the  hydra-headed  “  chimera  ”  could  not  be  crushed.  In¬ 
deed,  the  government  prosecutor  had  not  completed  his  task 
of  heaping  vengeance  on  the  organizers  of  the  movement 
when  a  new  force  of  recruits  appeared  on  the  battlefield 
ready  to  fight  and  to  win. 

But  this  begins  a  new  chapter  in  the  history  of  Chartism. 


1  Thomas  Carlyle,  Chartism,  London,  1840,  p.  2. 


APPENDIX  A 


Petition  Agreed  to  at  the  “  Crown  and  Anchor  ”  Meet¬ 
ing,  February  28th,  1837 

“To  the  Honorable  the  Commons  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire¬ 
land.  The  Petition  of  the  undersigned  Members  of  the  Work¬ 
ing  Men’s  Association  and  others  sheweth — 

“  That  the  only  rational  use  of  the  institutions  and  laws  of 
society  is  justly  to  protect,  encourage,  and  support  all  that  can 
be  made  to  contribute  to  the  happiness  of  all  the  people. 

“  That,  as  the  object  to  be  obtained  is  mutual  benefit,  so 
ought  the  enactment  of  laws  to  be  by  mutual  consent. 

“  That  obedience  to  laws  can  only  be  justly  enforced  on  the 
certainty  that  those  who  are  called  on  to  obey  them  have  had, 
either  personally  or  by  their  representatives,  a  power  to  enact, 
amend,  or  repeal  them. 

“  That  all  those  who  are  excluded  from  this  share  of  polit¬ 
ical  power  are  not  justly  included  within  the  operation  of  the 
laws ;  to  them  the  laws  are  only  despotic  enactments,  and  the 
legislative  assembly  from  whom  they  emanate  can  only  be 
considered  parties  to  an  unholy  compact,  devising  plans  and 
schemes  for  taxing  and  subjecting  the  many. 

“  That  the  universal  political  right  of  every  human  being  is 
superior  and  stands  apart  from  all  customs,  forms,  or  ancient 
usage ;  a  fundamental  right  not  in  the  power  of  man  to  confer, 
or  justly  to  deprive  him  of. 

“  That  to  take  away  this  sacred  right  from  the  person  and 
to  vest  it  in  property ,  is  a  wilful  perversion  of  justice  and 
common  sense,  as  the  creation  and  security  of  property  are  the 
consequences  of  society — the  great  object  of  which  is  human 
happiness. 

“  That  any  constitution  or  code  of  laws,  formed  in  violation 
208  [208 


APPENDIX  A 


209] 


209 


of  men’s  political  and  social  rights,  are  not  rendered  sacred 
by  time  nor  sanctified  by  custom. 

“  That  the  ignorance  which  originated,  or  permits  their 
operation,  forms  no  excuse  for  perpetuating  the  injustice;  nor 
can  aught  but  force  or  fraud  sustain  them,  when  any  consider¬ 
able  number  of  the  people  perceive  and  feel  their  degradation. 

“  That  the  intent  and  object  of  your  petitioners  are  to  pre¬ 
sent  such  facts  before  your  Honorable  House  as  will  serve  to 
convince  you  and  the  country  at  large  that  you  do  not  repre¬ 
sent  the  people  of  these  realms;  and  to  appeal  to  your  sense 
of  right  and  justice,  as  well  as  to  every  principle  of  honor,  for 
directly  making  such  legislative  enactments  as  shall  cause"  the 
mass  of  the  people  to  be  represented ;  with  the  view  of  secur¬ 
ing  the  greatest  amount  of  happiness  to  all  classes  of  society. 

“  Your  petitioners  find,  by  returns  ordered  by  your  Honor¬ 
able  House,  that  the  whole  people  of  Great  Britain  and  Ire¬ 
land  are  about  24  millions,  and  that  the  males  above  21  years 
of  age  are  6,023,752,  who,  in  the  opinion  of  your  petitioners, 
are  justly  entitled  to  the  elective  right. 

.  “That  according  to  S.  Wortley’s  return  (ordered  by  your 
Honorable  House)  the  number  of  registered  electors,  who  have 
the  power  to  vote  for  members  of  Parliament,  are  only  839,- 
519,  and  of  this  number  only  8)4  in  12  give  their  votes. 

“  That  on  an  analysis  of  the  constituency  of  the  United 
Kingdom,  your  petitioners  find  that  331  members  (being  a 
majority  of  your  Honorable  House)  are  returned  by  one  hun¬ 
dred  and  fifty-one  thousand  four  hundred  and  ninety-two 
registered  electors  l 

“  That  comparing  the  whole  of  the  male  population  above 
the  age  of  21  with  the  151,492  electors,  it  appears  that  -fa 
of  them,  or  of  the  entire  population,  have  the  power  of 
passing  all  the  laws  in  your  Honorable  House. 

“  And  your  petitioners  further  find,  on  investigation,  that 
this  majority  of  331  members  are  composed  of  163  Tories  or 
Conservatives,  134  Whigs  and  Liberals,  and  only  34  who  call 
themselves  Radicals ;  and  out  of  this  limited  number  it  is  ques¬ 
tionable  whether  10  can  be  found  who  are  truly  the  represen¬ 
tatives  of  the  wants  and  wishes  of  the  producing  classes. 


210 


APPENDIX  A 


[210 

“  Your  petitioners  also  find  that  15  members  of  your  Honor¬ 
able  House  are  returned  by  electors  under  200;  55  under  300; 
99  under  400;  12 1  under  500;  150  under  600;  196  under  700; 
214  under  800;  240  under  900;  and  256  under  1,000;  and 
that  many  of  these  constituencies  are  divided  between  two 
members. 

“  They  also  find  that  your  Honorable  House,  which  is  said 
to  be  exclusively  the  people’s  or  the  Commons’  House,  contains 
two  hundred  and  five  persons  who  are  immediately  or  remotely 
related  to  the  Peers  of  the  Realm. 

“  Also  that  your  Honorable  House  contains  1  marquess,  7 
earls,  19  viscounts,  32  lords,  25  right  honorables,  52  honor- 
ables,  63  baronets,  13  knights,  3  admirals,  7  lord-lieutenants, 
42  deputy  and  vice-lieutenants,  1  general,  5  lieutenant-generals, 
9  major-generals,  32  colonels,  33  lieutenant-colonels,  10  majors, 
49  captains  in  army  and  navy,  10  lieutenants,  2  cornets,  58 
barristers,  3  solicitors,  40  bankers,  33  East  India  proprietors, 
13  West  India  proprietors,  52  place-men,  114  patrons  of  church 
livings  having  the  patronage  of  274  livings  between  them; 
the  names  of  whom  your  petitioners  can  furnish  at  the  request 
of  your  Honorable  House. 

“Your  petitioners  therefore  respectfully  submit  to  your 
Honorable  House  that  these  facts  afford  abundant  proofs  that 
you  do  not  represent  the  numbers  or  the  interests  of  the  mil¬ 
lions  ;  but  that  the  persons  composing  it  have  interests  for  the 
most  part  foreign  or  directly  opposed  to  the  true  interests  of 
the  great  body  of  the  people. 

“  That  perceiving  the  tremendous  power  you  possess  over 
the  lives,  liberty  and  labor  of  the  unrepresented  millions — 
perceiving  the  military  and  civil  forces  at  your  command — the 
revenue  at  your  disposal — the  relief  of  the  poor  in  your  hands 
— the  public  press  in  your  power,  by  enactments  expressly  ex¬ 
cluding  the  working  classes  alone  —  moreover,  the  power  of 
delegating  to  others  the  whole  control  of  the  monetary  arrange¬ 
ments  of  the  Kingdom,  by  which  the  laboring  classes  may  be 
silently  plundered  or  suddenly  suspended  from  employment — 
seeing  all  these  elements  of  power  wielded  by  your  Honorable 


APPENDIX  A 


211 


211] 

House  as  at  present  constituted,  and  fearing  the  consequences 
that  may  result  if  a  thorough  reform  is  not  speedily  had  re¬ 
course  to,  your  petitioners  earnestly  pray  your  Honorable 
House  to  enact  the  following  as  the  law  of  these  realms ,  with 
such  other  essential  details  as  your  Honorable  House  shall 
deem  necessary: — 

“  A  Law  for  Equally  Representing  the  People  of  Great 

Britain  and  Ireland. 

EQUAL  REPRESENTATION 

“  That  the  United  Kingdom  be  divided  into  200  electoral 
districts;  dividing,  as  nearly  as  possible,  an  equal  number  of 
inhabitants ;  and  that  each  district  do  send  a  representative  to 
Parliament. 


UNIVERSAL  SUFFRAGE 

“  That  every  person  producing  proof  of  his  being  21  years 
of  age,  to  the  clerk  of  the  parish  in  which  he  has  resided  six 
months,  shall  be  entitled  to  have  his  name  registered  as  a 
voter.  That  the  time  for  registering  in  each  year  be  from  the 
1st  of  January  to  the  1st  of  March. 

ANNUAL  PARLIAMENTS 

“  That  a  general  election  do  take  place  on  the  24th  of  June 
in  each  year,  and  that  each  vacancy  be  filled  up  a  fortnight 
after  it  occurs.  That  the  hours  for  voting  be  from  six  o’clock 
in  the  morning  till  six  o’clock  in  the  evening. 

NO  PROPERTY  QUALIFICATIONS 

“  That  there  shall  be  no  property  qualifications  for  mem¬ 
bers;  but  on  a  requisition,  signed  by  200  voters,  in  favor  of 
any  candidate  being  presented  to  the  clerk  of  the  parish  in 
which  they  reside,  such  candidate  shall  be  put  in  nomination. 
And  the  list  of  all  the  candidates  nominated  throughout  the 
district  shall  be  stuck  on  the  church  door  in  every  parish,  to 
enable  voters  to  judge  of  their  qualification. 


212 


APPENDIX  A 


[212 


VOTE  BY  BALLOT 

“  That  each  voter  must  vote  in  the  parish  in  which  he  re¬ 
sides.  That  each  parish  provide  as  many  balloting  boxes  as 
there  are  candidates  proposed  in  the  district;  and  that  a  tem¬ 
porary  place  be  fitted  up  in  each  parish  church  for  the  purpose 
of  secret  voting.  And,  on  the  day  of  election,  as  each  voter 
passes  orderly  on  to  the  ballot,  he  shall  have  given  to  him,  by 
the  officer  in  attendance,  a  balloting  ball,  which  he  shall  drop 
into  the  box  of  his  favorite  candidate.  At  the  close  of  the  day 
the  votes  shall  be  counted,  by  the  proper  officers,  and  the 
numbers  stuck  on  the  church  doors.  The  following  day  the 
clerk  of  the  district  and  two  examiners  shall  collect  the  votes 
of  all  the  parishes  throughout  the  district,  and  cause  the  name 
of  the  successful  candidate  to  be  posted  in  every  parish  of  the 
district. 

SITTINGS  AND  PAYMENTS  TO  MEMBERS 

“  That  the  members  do  take  their  seats  in  Parliament  on  the 
first  Monday  in  October  next  after  their  election,  and  continue 
their  sittings  every  day  (Sundays  excepted)  till  the  business 
of  the  sitting  is  terminated,  but  not  later  than  the  1st  of  Sep¬ 
tember.  They  shall  meet  every  day  (during  the  Session)  for 
business  at  10  o’clock  in  the  morning,  and  adjourn  at  4.  And 
every  member  shall  be  paid  quarterly  out  of  the  public  treas¬ 
ury  ^400  a  year.  That  all  electoral  officers  shall  be  elected  by 
universal  suffrage. 

“  By  passing  the  foregoing  as  the  law  of  the  land,  you  will 
confer  a  great  blessing  on  the  people  of  England;  and  your 
petitioners,  as  in  duty  bound,  will  ever  pray.” 


APPENDIX  B 


The  People’s  Charter 

Being  a  bill  to  provide  for  the  just  representation  of  the  people 

of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  in  the  Commons’  House  of 

Parliament.  ( Published  on  the  8th  of  May ,  1838). 

Whereas  to  insure,  as  far  as  it  is  possible  by  human  fore¬ 
thought  and  wisdom,  the  just  government  of  the  people,  it  is 
necessary  to  subject  those  who  have  the  power  of  making  the 
laws  to  a  wholesome  and  strict  responsibility  to  those  whose 
duty  it  is  to  obey  them  when  made. 

And ,  whereas ,  this  responsibility  is  best  enforced  through 
the  instrumentality  of  a  body  which  emanates  directly  from, 
and  is  itself  immediately  subject  to,  the  whole  people,  and 
which  completely  represents  their  feelings  and  their  interests. 

And ,  whereas ,  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament  now  ex¬ 
ercises,  in  the  name  and  on  the  supposed  behalf  of  the  people, 
the  power  of  making  the  laws,  it  ought,  in  order  to  fulfill  with 
wisdom  and  with  honesty  the  great  duties  imposed  on  it,  to  be 
made  the' faithful  and  accurate  representation  of  the  people’s 
wishes,  feelings,  and  interests. 

Be  it  therefore  enacted: 

That,  from  and  after  the  passing  of  this  Act,  every  male 
inhabitant  of  these  realms  be  entitled  to  vote  for  the  election 
of  a  member  of  Parliament;  subject,  however,  to  the  follow¬ 
ing  conditions: 

1.  That  he  be  a  native  of  these  realms,  or  a  foreigner  who 
has  lived  in  this  country  upward  of  two  years,  and  been 
naturalized. 

2.  That  he  be  twenty-one  years  of  age. 

213] 


213 


214  APPENDIX  B  [2I4 

3.  That  he  be  not  proved  insane  when  the  lists  of  voters 
are  revised. 

4.  That  he  be  not  convicted  of  felony  within  six  months 
from  and  after  the  passing  of  this  Act.1 

5.  That  his  electoral  rights  be  not  suspended  for  bribery  at 
election,  or  for  personation,  or  for  forgery  of  election  certi¬ 
ficates,  according  to  the  penalties  of  this  Act. 

ELECTORAL  DISTRICTS 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  an  equal 
representation  of  the  people  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Par¬ 
liament,  the  United  Kingdom  be  divided  into  300  electoral 
districts.2 

II.  That  each  such  district  contain,  as  nearly  as  may  be,  an 
equal  number  of  inhabitants. 

III.  That  the  number  of  inhabitants  be  taken  from  the  last 
census,  and  as  soon  as  possible  after  the  next  ensuing  decennial 
census  shall  have  been  taken,  the  electoral  districts  be  made 
to  conform  thereto. 

IV.  That  each  electoral  district  be  named  after  the  prin¬ 
cipal  city  or  borough  within  its  limits. 

V.  That  each  electoral  district  return  one  representative  to 
sit  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament. 

VI.  That  the  Secretary  of  State  for  the  Home  Department 
shall  appoint  three  competent  persons  as  commissioners,  and 
as  many  sub-commissioners  as  may  be  necessary  for  settling 
the  boundaries  of  each  of  the  300  electoral  districts,  and  so  on 
from  time  to  time,  whenever  a  new  decennial  census  of  the 
people  be  taken. 

VII.  That  the  necessary  expenses  of  the  said  commissioners, 

1  “  The  People’s  Charter,”  as  revised  at  a  conference  held  at  Bir¬ 
mingham,  December,  1842,  reads :  “  4.  That  he  be  not  undergoing  the 
sentence  of  the  laws  at  the  time  when  called  upon  to  exercise  the  elec¬ 
toral  right.” 

2  There  are,  say,  6,000,000  of  men  eligible  to  vote.  This  number, 
divided  by  300,  gives  20,000  to  each  member. 


APPENDIX  B 


215] 


215 


sub-commissioners,  clerks,  and  other  persons  employed  by  them 
in  the  performance  of  their  duties,  be  paid  out  of  the  public 
treasury.  < 


REGISTRATION  OFFICERS 

Be  it  enacted,  that  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  an  accurate 
registration  of  voters,  for  finally  adjudicating  in  all  cases  of 
objections  made  against  persons  claiming  to  be  registered,  for 
receiving  the  nominations  of  Members  of  Parliament  and  Re¬ 
turning  Officers,  and  declaring  their  election ;  as  well  as  for 
conducting  and  superintending  all  matters  connected  with  regis¬ 
tration,  nomination,  and  election,  according  to  the  provisions 
of  this  Act,  the  following  officers  be  appointed : 

1.  Returning  Officers  for  each  electorial  district. 

2.  Deputy-Returning  Officers  for  each  district. 

3.  A  Registration  Clerk  for  every  parish  containing 
number  of  inhabitants,  or  for  every  two  or  more  parishes,  if 
united  for  the  purpose  of  this  Act. 

RETURNING  OFFICER,  AND  HIS  DUTIES 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  at  the  first  general  election  after  the 
passing  of  this  Act,  a  returning  officer  be  elected  for  every 
electoral  district  throughout  the  kingdom,  and  so  in  like 
manner  at  the  end  of  every  three  years.1 

II.  That,  at  the  end  of  every  such  period,  the  returning 
officer  for  each  district  be  nominated  in  like  manner,  and 
elected  at  the  same  time,  as  the  Member  of  Parliament  for  the 
district;  he  shall  be  eligible  to  be  re-elected. 

III.  That  vacancies  occasioned  by  the  death,  removal,  or 
resignation  of  the  returning  officer,  shall  in  like  manner  be 
filled  up  as  vacancies  for  Members  of  Parliament,  for  the  un¬ 
expired  term  of  the  three  years.2 

IV.  That  every  returning  officer  shall  appoint  a  deputy  re- 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  at  the  end  of  every  year.” 

2  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  for  the  unexpired  term  of  the 
year.” 


21 6 


APPENDIX  B 


[216 

turning  officer,  for  the  day  of  election,  for  every  balloting  place 
within  his  district,  and  in  all  cases  be  responsible  for  the  just 
fulfilment  of  the  duties  of  such  deputies. 

V.  That  it  be  the  duty  of  the  returning  officers  to  appoint 

a  registration  clerk  for  every  parish  within  his  district  con¬ 
taining  number  of  inhabitants,  or  for  every  two  or  more 

parishes  if  united  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act;  and  that  in  all 
cases  he  be  responsible  for  the  just  fulfilment  of  the  duties  of 
such  clerks. 

VI.  That  he  also  see  that  proper  balloting  places,  and  such 
other  erections  as  may  be  necessary,  be  provided  by  each  parish 
(or  any  number  that  may  be  united)  and  that  the  balloting 
boxes  be  made  and  provided  according  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

VII.  That  he  receive  the  lists  of  voters  from  all  the  parishes 
in  his  district,  in  which  lists  shall  be  marked  or  specified  the 
names  of  the  persons  who  have  been  objected  to  by  the  regis¬ 
tration  clerks  or  any  other  persons. 

VIII.  That  between  the  first  of  April  and  the  first  of  May 
in  each  year,  he  shall  hold  open  courts  of  adjudication  at  such 
a  number  of  places  within  his  district  as  he  may  deem  neces¬ 
sary,  of  which  courts  (place  and  time  of  meeting)  he  shall 
cause  due  notice  to  be  given  in  each  parish  of  the  district,  and 
at  the  same  time  invite  all  persons  who  have  made  objections, 
and  who  have  been  objected  to.  And,  after  hearing  the  state¬ 
ments  that  may  be  made  by  both  parties,  he  shall  finally  ad¬ 
judicate  whether  the  voters’  names  be  placed  on  the  register 
or  not. 

IX.  That  the  returning  officer  shall  then  cause  to  be  made 
out  alphabetical  lists  of  all  the  registered  voters  in  all  the 
parishes  within  his  district ;  which  lists,  signed  and  attested  by 
himself,  shall  be  used  at  all  elections  for  the  district.  Such 
lists  to  be  sold  to  the  public  at  reasonably  low  prices. 

X.  That  the  returning  officer  receive  all  nominations  for 
the  member  of  his  district,  as  well  as  for  the  returning  officer 
of  his  district,  and  shall  give  public  notice  of  the  same  accord¬ 
ing  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act;  he  shall  also  receive  from  the 


APPENDIX  B 


217 


217] 

Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  the  orders  for  any  new 
election,  in  case  of  the  death  or  resignation  of  the  member  of 
the  district,  as  well  as  the  orders  to  superintend  and  conduct 
the  election  of  any  other  district,  in  case  of  the  death  or  resigna¬ 
tion  of  the  returning  officer  of  such  district. 

XI.  That  the  returning  officer  shall  also  receive  the  returns 
from  all  the  parishes  within  his  district,  on  the  day  of  election ; 
and  on  the  day  following  the  election  he  shall  proclaim  the 
state  of  the  ballot,  as  directed  by  this  Act,  and  perform  the 
several  duties  appertaining  to  his  office,  as  herein  made  and 
provided. 

XII.  That  the  returning  officer  be  paid  for  fulfilling  the 

duties  of  his  office,  the  sum  of  per  annum,  as  herein¬ 

after  mentioned. 

XIII.  That,  upon  a  petition  being  presented  to  the  House 
of  Commons  by  at  least  one  hundred  qualified  electors,  against 
any  returning  officer,1  complaining  of  corruption  in  the  exer¬ 
cise  of  his  office,  or  of  incapacity,  such  complaints  shall  be 
inquired  into  by  a  committee  of  the  House,  consisting  of  seven 
members ;  and,  on  their  report  being  read,  the  members  present 
shall  then  determine  whether  such  returning  officer  be  or  be 
not  guilty,  or  be  or  be  not  incapacitated. 

XIV.  That,  for  conducting  the  first  elections  after  the  pass¬ 
ing  of  this  Act,  a  returning  officer  for  each  district  be  tem¬ 
porarily  appointed  by  the  Secretary  of  State,  to  perform  the 
duties  prescribed  by  this  Act.  He  shall  resign  his  office  as 
soon  as  the  new  one  is  appointed,  and  be  paid  as  hereinafter 
mentioned. — See  Penalties. 

DEPUTY  RETURNING  OFFICER,  AND  HIS  DUTIES 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  a  deputy  returning  officer  be  appointed 
by  the  district  returning  officer  to  preside  at  each  balloting 
place  on  the  day  of  election,  such  deputy  to  be  subject  and 
responsible  to  his  authority,  as  well  as  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  at  least  one  hundred  qualified  elec¬ 
tors  of  the  district,  against  any  returning  officer  of  the  same.” 


218  appendix  B  [218 

II.  That  it  be  the  duty  of  the  deputy  returning  officer  to 

provide  a  number  of  competent  persons,  not  exceeding  , 

to  aid  him  in  taking  the  ballot,  and  for  performing  the  neces¬ 
sary  business  thereof. 

III.  That  the  deputy  returning  officer  shall  see  that  proper 
registration  lists  are  provided,  and  that  the  ballot  begin  at  six 
o’clock  in  the  morning  precisely,  and  end  at  six  o’clock  in  the 
afternoon  of  the  same  day. 

IV.  That  the  deputy  returning  officer,  in  the  presence  of 
the  agents  of  the  candidates,  examine  and  seal  the  balloting- 
boxes  previous  to  the  commencement  of  the  balloting ;  he  shall, 
in  like  manner,  declare  the  number  of  votes  for  each  candidate, 
and  shall  cause  a  copy,  signed  by  himself,  to  be  forwarded  to 
the  returning  officer  of  the  district,  and  another  copy  to  the 
registration  clerk  of  the  parish. 

V.  That  the  deputy  returning  officer  be  paid  for  his  services 
as  hereinafter  mentioned. — See  Penalties. 

THE  REGISTRATION  CLERK,  HIS  DUTIES 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  a  registration  clerk  be  appointed  by 

the  district  returning  officer  for  every  parish  within  his  dis¬ 
trict  containing  inhabitants;  or  for  every  two  or  more 

parishes  that  may  be  united  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act ;  such 
clerk  to  be  responsible  to  his  authority,  as  well  as  to  the  pro¬ 
visions  of  this  Act. 

II.  That  for  the  purpose  of  obtaining  a  correct  registration 
of  all  the  voters  in  each  electoral  district,  the  registration  clerk 
of  every  parish,  as  aforesaid,  throughout  the  kingdom,  shall, 
on  or  before  the  1st  of  February  in  each  year,  take  or  cause 
to  be  taken  round  to  every  dwelling  house  1  in  his  parish,  a 
printed  notice  of  the  following  form : 

Mr.  John  Jones,  you  are  hereby  required,  within  six  days  from  the 
date  hereof,  to  fill  up  this  list  with  the  names  of  all  male  inhabitants 
of  your  house,  of  21  years  of  age,  and  upwards;  stating  their  respec- 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  to  every  dwelling-house,  poor- 
house,  or  union-workhouse  in  his  parish.” 


APPENDIX  B 


219] 


219 


tive  ages,  and  the  time  they  have  resided  with  you;  or,  in  neglect 
thereof,  to  forfeit  the  sum  of  one  pound.1 

A.  B.,  Registration  Clerk. 


Name. 

Address. 

Age. 

Time  of 
Residence. 

John  Jones. 

6  Upper  North  Place. 

21  years. 

3  months. 

N.  B. — This  list  will  be  called  for  at  the  expiration  of  six  days  from 
this  date. 


III.  That,  at  the  expiration  of  six  days,  as  aforesaid,  the 
registration  clerk  shall  collect,  or  cause  to  be  collected,  the 
aforesaid  lists,  and  shall  cause  to  be  made  out  from  them  an 
alphabetical  list  of  all  persons  who  are  of  the  proper  age  and 
residence  to  qualify  them  as  voters,  according  to  the  provisions 
of  this  Act. 

IV.  That  if  the  registration  clerk  shall  have  any  just  reason 
to  believe  that  the  names,  ages,  or  time  of  residence  of  any 
persons  inserted  in  the  aforesaid  list  are  falsely  entered,  or  not 
in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  he  shall  write 
the  words  “  objected  to  ”  opposite  such  names;  and  so  in  like 
manner  against  the  names  of  every  person  he  may  have  just 
reason  to  consider  ineligible,  according  to  the  provisions  of 
this  Act. 

V.  That  on  or  before  the  8th  of  March  in  each  year,  the 
registration  clerk  shall  cause  the  aforesaid  alphabetical  list  of 
voters  to  be  stuck  against  all  church  and  chapel  doors,  market- 
houses,  town-halls,  session-houses,2  and  such  other  conspicuous 
places  as  he  may  deem  necessary,  from  the  8th  of  March  till 
the  22nd.  He  shall  also  cause  a  copy  of  such  list  to  lie  at 
his  office,  to  be  perused  by  any  person  without  a  fee,  at  all 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  the  sum  of  one  pound  for  every 
name  omitted ” 

*  The  revised  “Charter”  added:  “poor  houses,  union  workhouses.” 


APPENDIX  B 


220 


[220 


reasonable  hours;  and  copies  of  the  said  list  shall  be  sold 
to  the  public  at  a  reasonably  low  price. 

VI.  That,  on  or  before  the  25th  of  March,  the  registration 
clerk  shall  take,  or  cause  to  be  taken  a  copy  of  the  aforesaid 
list  of  voters  to  the  returning  officer  of  his  district,  which  list 
shall  be  signed  by  himself,  and  be  presented  as  a  just  and 
impartial  list,  according  to  his  judgment,  of  all  persons  with¬ 
in  his  parish  who  are  eligible  according  to  their  claims,  as  well 
as  of  all  those  who  have  been  objected  to  by  himself  or 
other  persons. 

VII.  That  the  registration  clerk  shall  attend  the  court  of 
adjudication,  according  to  the  notice  he  shall  receive  from  the 
returning  officer,  to  revise  his  list,  and  shall  perform  all  the 
duties  of  his  office  as  herein  provided. 

VIII.  That  the  registration  clerk  be  paid  for  his  services  in 
the  manner  hereinafter  mentioned. 


ARRANGEMENT  FOR  REGISTRATION 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  every  householder,  as  well  as  every 
person  occupying  or  having  charge  of  a  dwelling-house,1  who 
shall  receive  a  notice  from  the  registration  clerk  as  aforesaid, 
shall  cause  the  said  notice  to  be  correctly  filled  up  with  the 
names,  ages,  and  time  of  residence  of  every  male  inmate  or 
inhabitant  of  his  or  her  house,  of  twenty-one  years  of  age  and 
upwards,  within  six  days  of  the  day  of  the  date  of  such  notice, 
and  shall  carefully  preserve  the  same  till  it  is  called  for  by  the 
registration  clerk,  or  his  proper  officer. 

II.  That  when  the  list  of  voters  is  made  out  from  these 
notices,  and  stuck  on  the  church  doors,  2  as  aforesaid,  any 
person  who  finds  his  name  not  inserted  in  the  list,  and  who 
believes  he  is  duly  qualified  as  a  voter,  shall,  on  presenting  to 
the  registration  clerk  a  notice  in  the  following  form,  have 
his  name  added  to  the  list  of  voters: 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  poor  house,  or  union  workhouse  w. 

2  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  added :  “  and  places.” 


APPENDIX  B 


221 


221  ] 

I,  John  Jones,  carpenter,  residing  at  in  the  district  of 

being  twenty  one  years  of  age,  and  having  resided  at  the  above  place 
during  the  last  three  months,  require  to  be  placed  on  the  list  of  voters, 
as  a  qualified  elector  for  the  said  district. 

III.  That  any  person  who  is  qualified  as  a  voter  in  any 
electoral  district,  and  shall  have  removed  to  any  other  parish 
i within  the  said  district,  on  presenting  to  the  registration  clerk 
of  the  parish  he  then  resides  in,  his  voter’s  certificate  as  proof 
of  this,  or  the  written  testimony  of  any  registration  clerk  who 
has  previously  registered  him,  he  shall  be  entitled  to  be  placed 
on  the  list  of  voters  as  aforesaid. 

IV.  That  if  an  elector  of  any  parish  in  the  district  have  any 
just  grounds  for  believing  that  any  person  disqualified  by  this 
Act  has  been  put  upon  any  parish  register  within  the  said 
district,  he  may,  at  any  reasonable  hour,  between  the  ist  and 
the  20th  day  of  March,  cause  the  following  notices  to  be  de¬ 
livered  ;  the  one  at  the  residence  of  the  registration  clerk,  and 
the  other  at  the  residence  of  the  person  objected  to;  and  the 
registration  clerk  shall,  in  like  manner,  send  notice  of  the 
ground  of  objection  to  all  persons  he  may  object  to,  as  afore¬ 
said: 

To  the  Registration  Clerk. 

I,  William  Smith,  elector  of  the  parish  of  in  the  district 

of  object  to  A.  B.  being  on  the  register  of  voters,  believing 

him  to  be  disqualified. 

Dated  this  day,  etc . 

To  the  person  objected  to: 

Mr.  A.  B.  of  I,  William  Smith,  elector  of  the  parish 

of  in  the  district  of  object  to  your  name  being 

on  the  register  of  voters  for  the  following  reasons: — (here  state  the 
reasons) — and  I  will  support  my  objections  by  proofs  before  the  Re¬ 
turning  Officer  of  the  District. 

Dated  this  day,  etc. 

V.  That  if  the  person  thus  objecting  neglect  to  attend  the 
court  of  the  returning  officer  at  the  proper  time,  to  state  his 


222 


APPENDIX  B 


[222 

objections,  he  shall  be  fined  ten  shillings  for  every  such  neglect, 
the  same  to  be  levied  on  his  goods  and  chattels,  provided  he  is 
not  prevented  from  attending  by  sickness  or  accident,  in  which 
case  his  medical  certificate,  or  a  certificate  signed  by  ten  voters 
certifying  such  fact,  shall  be  forwarded  to  the  returning  officer, 
who  shall  then  determine  whether  the  claim  to  be  put  on  the 
register  be  allowed  or  not. 

VI.  That  if  the  person  objected  to  fails  to  attend  the  court 
of  the  returning  officer  at  the  proper  time,  to  substantiate  his 
claim,  his  name  shall  be  erased  from  the  register,  provided  he 
is  not  prevented  by  sickness  or  accident ;  in  which  case  a  certi¬ 
ficate  shall  be  forwarded,  and  the  returning  officer  shall  deter¬ 
mine,  as  before  directed. 

VII.  That  if  it  should  be  proved  before  the  returning  officer, 
in  his  open  court  of  adjudication,  that  any  person  has  frivo¬ 
lously  or  vexatiously  objected  to  any  one  being  placed  on  the 
list  of  voters,  such  person  objecting  shall  be  fined  twenty  shill¬ 
ings,  the  same  to  be  levied  on  his  goods  and  chattels.1 

VIII.  That,  as  early  as  possible  after  the  lists  are  revised  as 
aforesaid,  the  returning  officer  shall  cause  a  copy  of  the  same 
to  be  forwarded  to  every  registration  clerk  within  his  district. 

IX.  That  the  registration  clerk  of  every  parish  shall  then 

correctly  copy  from  such  lists  the  name,  age,  and  residence 
of  every  qualified  elector  within  his  parish  or  parishes,  into  a 
book  made  for  that  purpose,  and  shall  place  a  number  opposite 
each  name.  He  shall  then,  within  days,  take,  or  cause 

to  be  taken,  to  all  such  electors,  a  voter’s  certificate  of  the 
following  form,  the  number  on  which  shall  correspond  with  the 
number  in  the  aforesaid  book : 

No.  123.  This  is  to  certify  that  James  Jones,  of  is  eligible 

to  vote  for  one  person  to  be  returned  to  Parliament  (as  well  as  for 
the  (Returning  Officer)  for  the  district  of  for  one  year  from 

the  date  hereof. 

Dated 

Registration  Clerk. 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  provides  for  a  fine  of  “  twenty  shillings 
and  expenses,  the  same  to  be  levied  on  his  goods  and  chattels,  and  paid 
to  the  person  objected  to.” 


APPENDIX  B 


223 


223] 

X.  That  if  any  person  lose  his  voter's  certificate  by  fire,  or 
any  other  accident,  he  shall  not  have  a  new  certificate  till  the 
next  registration;  but  on  the  day  of  any  election,  if  he  can 
establish  his  identity,  on  the  testimony  of  two  witnesses,  to  the 
satisfaction  of  the  registration  clerk,  as  being  the  qualified 
voter  described  in  the  registration  book,  he  shall  be  allowed 
to  vote. 

XI.  That  the  returning  officer  is  hereby  authorized  and  com¬ 
manded  to  attach  any  small  parishes  to  any  adjacent  parish  1 
within  his  district  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act,  and  not  other¬ 
wise;  and  in  like  manner  to  unite  all  extra-parochial  places  to 
some  adjacent  parish. — See  Penalties. 

ARRANGEMENT  FOR  NOMINATIONS 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  for  the  purpose  of  guarding  against  too 
great  a  number,  who  might  otherwise  be  heedlessly  proposed, 
as  well  as  for  giving  time  for  the  electors  to  inquire  into  the 
merits  of  the  persons  who  may  be  nominated  for  members  of 
Parliament,  as  well  as  for  returning  officers,  that  all  nomin¬ 
ations  be  taken  as  hereinafter  directed. 

II.  That  for  all  general  elections  of  members  of  Parliament 
a  requisition  of  the  following  form,  signed  by  at  least  one  hun¬ 
dred  qualified  electors  of  the  district,  be  delivered  to  the  re¬ 
turning  officer  of  the  district,  between  the  1st  and  10th  day  of 
May  in  each  year;  and  that  such  requisition  constitute  the 
nomination  of  such  person  as  a  candidate  for  the  district : 

We,  the  undersigned  electors  of  the  district  of  recommend 

A.  B.  of  as  a  fit  and  proper  person  to  represent  the  people 

of  this  district  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament,  the  said  A.  B. 
being  a  qualified  elector  of  these  realms.2 

Dated,  etc. 

Signed. 

III.  That  the  returning  officer  of  every  electoral  district 

1  The  italicized  phrase  was  omitted  in  the  revised  “  Charter.” 

2  The  revised  “Charter”  reads:  “the  said  A.  B.  being  qualified  to 
be  an  elector  according  to  the  provisions  of  this  Act. 


224 


APPENDIX  B 


[224 

shall,  on  or  before  the  13th  of  May  in  each  year,  cause  a  list 
of  all  the  candidates  thus  nominated  to  be  stuck  up  against  all 
church  and  chapel  doors,  market-houses,  town-halls,  session- 
houses,1  and  such  other  conspicuous  places  within  the  district 
as  he  may  deem  necessary. 

IV.  That  whenever  a  vacancy  is  occasioned  in  any  district 
by  the  death,  resignation,  or  other  cause,  of  the  member  of 
Parliament,  the  returning  officer  of  that  district  shall,  within 
three  days  after  the  receipt  of  his  orders  from  the  Speaker 
of  the  House  of  Commons,  give  notice  thereof  in  all  the 
parishes  of  his  district  in  the  manner  described  for  giving 
notices,  and  he  shall  at  the  same  time  request  all  nominations 
to  be  made  as  aforesaid,  within  ten  days  from  the  receipt  of  his 
order,  and  shall  also  appoint  the  day  of  election  within  eighteen 
days  from  the  receipt  of  such  order  from  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  of  Commons. 

V.  That  if,  from  any  circumstances,  no  person  has  been 
nominated  as  a  candidate  for  the  district  on  or  before  the  10th 
of  May,  persons  may  then  be  nominated  in  the  manner  de¬ 
scribed  as  aforesaid  at  any  time  previous  to  the  20th  of  May, 
but  not  otherwise.2 3 

VI.  That  at  the  first  election  after  the  passing  of  this  Act, 
and  at  the  expiration  of  every  three  succeeding  years,  the 
nomination  of  candidates  for  the  returning  officer  be  made  in 
the  same  manner  as  for  the  members  of  Parliament,  and 
nominations  for  vacancies  that  may  occur  in  like  manner. 

VII.  That  if  two  or  more  persons  are  nominated  as  afore¬ 

said  for  members  to  serve  in  Parliament  for  the  district,  the 
returning  officer  shall,  at  any  time  between  the  15th  and  31st 
of  May,  (Sundays  excepted),  appoint  such  times  and  places 
(not  exceeding  )  as  he  shall  think  most  convenient 

to  the  electors  of  the  district  for  the  candidates  to  appear  be- 

1  In  the  revised  “  Charter,”  “  poor-houses,  and  union  workhouses  ” 
were  added. 

2  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  but  not  after  that  date.” 

3  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  at  the  expiration  of  every  year.” 


APPENDIX  B 


225] 


225 


fore  them,  then  and  there  to  explain  their  views  and  solicit 
the  suffrages  of  the  electors. 

VIII.  That  the  returning  officer  see  that  the  places  above 
described  be  convenient  for  the  purpose,  and  that  as  many  such 
erections  be  put  up  as  may  be  necessary;  the  same  to  be  paid 
for  by  the  returning  officer,  and  charged  in  his  account  as 
hereinafter  mentioned. 

IX.  That  for  the  purpose  of  keeping  good  order  and  public 
decorum,  the  returning  officer  either  take  the  chair  at  such 
meeting  himself,  or  appoint  a  deputy  for  that  purpose. 

X.  That,  provided  only  one  candidate  be  proposed  for  a 
member  of  Parliament  for  the  district  by  the  time  herein 
before  mentioned,  the  returning  officer  cause  notice  to  be  given, 
as  hereinafter  mentioned,  that  such  candidate  is  elected  a 
member  for  the  district ;  and  if  only  one  candidate  be  proposed 
for  the  returning  officer,  he  shall  in  like  manner  be  declared 
duly  elected. 

XI.  That  no  other  qualification  shall  be  required  for  mem¬ 
bers  to  serve  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament,  than  the 
choice  of  the  electors.1 — See  Penalties. 


ARRANGEMENT  FOR  ELECTIONS 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  a  general  election  of  members  of 
Parliament,  for  the  electoral  districts  of  the  United  Kingdom, 
take  place  on  the  first  Monday  in  June  in  each  year;  and  that 
all  vacancies,  by  death  or  otherwise,  shall  be  filled  up  as  nearly 
as  possible  within  eighteen  days  after  they  occur. 

II.  That  a  general  election  of  returning  officer  for  all  the 
districts  take  place  at  the  expiration  of  every  three  years  on 
the  first  Monday  in  June,  and  at  the  same  time  members  of 


1  The  revised  “Charter”  provides:  “XI.  That  no  other  qualification 
shall  be  required  than  the  choice  of  the  electors,  according  to  the  pro¬ 
visions  of  this  Act;  providing  that  no  persons,  excepting  the  cabinet 
ministers,  be  eligible  to  serve  in  the  Commons’  House  of  Parliament 
who  are  in  the  receipt  of  any  emolument  derivable  from  any  place  or 
places  held  under  Government,  or  of  retired  allowances  arising  there¬ 
from.” 


226 


APPENDIX  B 


[226 

Parliament  are  to  be  elected;  and  that  all  vacancies  be  filled 
up,  as  nearly  as  possible,  within  eighteen  days  after  they  occur. 

III.  That  every  person  who  has  been  registered  as  aforesaid, 
and  who  has  a  voter’s  certificate,  shall  have  the  right  of  voting 
in  the  district  in  which  he  has  been  registered,  and  in  that  only, 
and  of  voting  for  the  member  of  Parliament  for  that  district, 
and  the  returning  officer  for  the  district,  and  for  those  only. 

IV.  That,  for  the  purpose  of  taking  the  votes  of  the  quali¬ 
fied  electors,  the  parish  officer  in  every  parish  of  the  district 
(or  in  every  two  parishes  if  united  for  that  purpose)  shall 
cause  proper  places  to  be  privided,  so  as  to  admit  of  the 
arrangements  described  in  Schedule  A,  and  so  constructed 
(either  permanently  or  temporarily  as  they  may  think  proper) 
that  the  votes  may  be  taken  with  due  despatch,  and  so  as  to 
secure  the  elector  while  voting  from  being  inspected  by  any 
other  person. 

V.  That  the  parish  officers  of  every  parish  in  the  district 
provide  a  sufficient  number  of  balloting-boxes,  made  after  a 
model  described  in  Schedule  B  (or  made  on  one  plan  by  per¬ 
sons  appointed  to  make  them,  as  was  the  case  with  weights  and 
measures),  and  none  but  such  boxes,  duly  certified,  shall  be 
used. 

VI.  That  immediately  preceeding  the  commencement  of  the 
balloting,  each  ballot-box  shall  be  opened  by  the  deputy  re¬ 
turning  officer  (or  otherwise  examined,  as  the  case  may  be), 
in  the  presence  of  an  agent  appointed  by  each  candidate,  and 
shall  then  be  sealed  by  him  and  by  the  agents  of  the  candidates, 
and  not  again  be  opened  until  the  balloting  has  finally  closed, 
when  notice  shall  be  given  to  such  of  the  agents  of  the  candi¬ 
dates  as  may  then  be  present  to  attend  to  the  opening  of  the 
boxes  and  ascertaining  the  number  of  votes  for  each  candidate. 

VII.  That  the  deputy  returning  officer  preside  in  the  front 
of  the  ballot-box,  and  see  that  the  balloting  is  conducted  with 
strict  impartiality  and  justice;  and  that  the  various  clerks, 
assistants,  and  parish  constables  properly  perform  their  re¬ 
spective  duties,  and  that  strict  order  and  decorum  be  preserved 
among  the  friends  of  the  candidates,  as  well  as  among  all  per- 


APPENDIX  B 


227 


227] 

sons  employed  in  conducting  the  election;  and  he  is  hereby 
authorized  and  empowered  to  cause  all  persons  to  be  taken  into 
custody  who  interrupt  the  proceedings  of  the  election,  seek  to 
contravene  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  or  fail  to  obey  his 
lawful  authority. 

VIII.  That  during  the  time  the  balloting  is  going  on,  two 
agents  of  each  candidate  may  be  in  the  space  fronting  the 
ballot-box,  and  immediately  behind  the  deputy  returning  officer, 
in  order  that  they  may  see  that  the  election  is  fairly  conducted ; 
such  persons  to  be  provided  by  the  deputy  returning  officer  with 
cards  of  admission,  and  to  pass  in  and  out  by  the  entrance  as¬ 
signed  them. 

IX.  That  the  registration  clerk  of  every  parish  in  the  dis¬ 
trict,  who  has  been  appointed  for  the  purposes  of  registration, 
be  at  the  balloting  place,  in  the  station  assigned  him,  previously 
to  the  commencement  of  the  balloting,  and  see  that  no  person 
pass  on  to  the  balloting  place  till  he  has  examined  his  certifi¬ 
cate  and  seen  that  it  corresponds  with  the  registration  list. 

X.  That  the  parish  constables  and  the  officers  stationed  at 
the  entrance  of  the  balloting  place,  shall  not  permit  any  person 
to  enter  unless  he  shows  his  voter’s  certificate,  except  the  per¬ 
sons  employed  in  conducting  the  election,  or  those  persons  who 
have  proved  the  loss  of  their  voter’s  certificate. 

XI.  That  at  the  end  of  every  three  years,1  or  whenever  the 
returning  officer  is  elected  at  the  same  time  as  the  member 
for  the  district,  a  division  shall  be  made  in  the  balloting  places, 
and  the  boxes  and  balloting  so  arranged  as  to  ensure  the  can¬ 
didates  the  strictest  impartiality  and  justice,  by  preventing  the 
voter  from  giving  two  votes  for  either  of  the  candidates. 

XII.  That  on  the  day  of  election,  the  balloting  commence  at 
six  o’clock  in  the  forenoon  and  terminate  at  six  o’clock  in  the 
afternoon  of  the  same  day. 

XIII.  That  when  any  voter’s  certificate  is  examined  by  the 
registration  clerk,  and  found  to  be  correct,  he  shall  be  allowed 
to  pass  on  to  the  next  barrier,  where  a  balloting-ball  shall  be 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  at  the  end  of  every  year.” 


228 


APPENDIX  B 


[228 

given  him  by  the  person  appointed  for  that  purpose;  he  shall 
then  pass  on  to  the  balloting  box,  and,  with  all  due  despatch, 
shall  put  the  balloting-ball  into  the  aperture  opposite  the  name  1 
of  the  candidate  he  wishes  to  vote  for,  after  which  he  shall, 
without  delay,  leave  the  room  by  the  door  assigned  for  the 
purpose. 

XIV.  That,  at  the  close  of  the  balloting,  the  deputy  return¬ 
ing  officer,  in  the  presence  of  the  agents  of  the  candidates  and 
other  persons  present,  shall  break  open  the  seals  of  the  ballot- 
ing-boxes,  and  ascertain  the  number  for  each  candidate;  he 
shall  then  cause  copies  of  the  same  to  be  publicly  posted  outside 
the  balloting  place;  and  immediately  forward  (by  a  trusty 
messenger)  a  copy  of  the  same,  signed  by  himself  and  the 
agents  present,  to  the  returning  officer  of  the  district;  he  shall 
then  deliver  a  similar  copy  to  the  registration  clerk,  who  shall 
carefully  preserve  the  same,  and  produce  it  if  necessary. 

XV.  That  the  persons  employed  as  assistants,  for  inspecting 
the  certificates  and  attending  on  the  balloting,  be  paid  as  here¬ 
inafter  mentioned. 

XVI.  That  all  the  expense  of  registration,  nominations  and 
election,  as  aforesaid,  together  with  the  salaries  of  the  return¬ 
ing  officers,  registration  clerk,  assistants,  constables,  and  such 
other  persons  as  may  be  necessary,  as  well  as  the  expense  of 
all  balloting  places,  balloting-boxes,  hustings,  and  other  neces¬ 
saries  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act,  be  paid  out  of  an  equitable 
district  rate,  which  a  District  Board,  composed  of  one  parochial 
officer  chosen  by  each  of  the  parishes  in  the  district,  or  for  any 
two  or  more  parishes,  if  united  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act,  are 
hereby  empowered  and  commanded  to  levy  on  all  householders 
within  the  district. 

XVIII.  That  all  expenses  necessary  for  the  purposes  of  this 
Act  incurred  within  the  district  be  paid  by  the  District  Board 
as  aforesaid,  or  their  treasurer ;  that  the  salaries  of  all  officers 
and  assistants  required  for  the  purposes  of  this  Act,  be  fixed 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  into  the  box  of  the  candidate.” 


APPENDIX  B 


229] 


229 


and  paid  by  the  said  Board,  according  to  the  expenses  and 
duties  of  the  various  localities. 1 

XVIII.  That  all  accounts  of  receipts  and  expenditure  for 
electoral  purposes  shall  be  kept  distinct,  and  be  audited  by 
auditors  appointed  by  the  District  Board,  as  aforesaid;  copies 
of  which  accounts  shall  be  printed  for  the  use  of  the  respective 
parishes  in  the  district. 

XIX.  That  all  canvassing  for  members  of  Parliament,  as 
well  as  for  returning  officers,  is  hereby  declared  to  be  illegal, 
and  meetings  for  that  purpose  during  the  balloting,  on  the  day 
of  election,  are  hereby  also  declared  to  be  illegal. — See 
Penalties. 


DURATION  OF  PARLIAMENT 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  the  Members  of  the  House  of  Com¬ 
mons,  chosen  as  aforesaid,  shall  meet  on  the  first  Monday  in 
June  in  each  year,  and  continue  their  sittings  from  time  to 
time  as  they  may  deem  it  convenient,  till  the  first  Monday  in 
June  following,  when  the  next  new  Parliament  shall  be  chosen; 
they  shall  be  eligible  to  be  re-elected. 

II.  That  during  an  adjournment  they  be  liable  to  be  called 
together  by  the  executive  in  cases  of  emergency. 

III.  That  a  register  be  kept  of  the  daily  attendance  of  each 
member,  which,  at  the  close  of  the  session,  shall  be  printed 
as  a  sessional  paper,  showing  how  the  members  have  attended. 

PAYMENT  OF  MEMBERS 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  every  member  of  the  House  of  Com¬ 
mons,  be  entitled,  at  the  close  of  the  session,  to  a  writ  of  ex- 

1  The  Committee  having  considered  that,  as  the  duties  and  expenses 
of  all  these  various  offices  will  greatly  vary,  according  to  their  local¬ 
ities,  it  will  be  unwise  to  have  a  sum  fixed  by  Parliament  and  paid  out 
of  the  treasury.  Believing,  moreover,  that  a  just  system  of  representa¬ 
tion  will  soon  purify  the  local  corruptions  that  exist,  they  think  that 
the  united  expenditure  will  be  much  less  under  the  immediate  superin¬ 
tendence  of  the  local  authorities,  when  responsible  to  the  people,  than 
under  the  management  of  government  and  their  subordiate  agents. 


APPENDIX  B 


230 


[230 


penses  on  the  Treasury,  for  his  legislative  duties  in  the  public 
service,  and  shall  be  paid  £500  1  per  annum.2 


PENALTIES 

I.  Be  it  enacted,  that  if  any  person  cause  himself  to  be 
registered  in  more  than  one  electoral  district,  and  vote  in  more 
than  one  such  district,  upon  conviction  thereof  before  any  two 
justices  of  the  peace  within  either  of  such  districts,  he  shall 
incur  for  the  first  offence  the  penalty  of  three  months’  im¬ 
prisonment,  and  for  the  second  offence  twelve  months’  im¬ 
prisonment. 

II.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid 
of  wilfully  neglecting  to  fill  up  his  or  her  notice  within  the 
proper  time,  or  of  leaving  out  the  name  of  any  inmate  in  his 
or  her  notice,  shall  for  the  first  offence  incur  the  penalty  of 
five  pounds,  and  three  months’  imprisonment  for  the  second 
offence.3 

III.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid 
of  forging  any  name,  age,  or  time  of  residence  on  any  notice, 
shall  for  the  first  offence  incur  the  penalty  of  three  months’ 
imprisonment,  and  for  the  second  offence  be  deprived  of  his 
elective  rights  for  five  years.4 

IV.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid, 
of  having  in  any  manner  obtained  the  certificate  of  an  elector 


1  The  amount  was  omitted  in  the  revised  “  Charter.” 

2  The  Committee  understand  that  the  daily  payment  of  members  of 
Parliament  has  operated  beneficially  in  Canada ;  but  they  fear  that  such 
mode  of  payment  holds  out  a  motive  for  lengthening  the  sessions  un¬ 
necessarily;  and  if  the  time  of  sitting  is  limited  by  law,  it  may  lead  to 
too  hasty  legislation,  both  of  which  evils  are  obviated  by  an  annual 
payment. 

3  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  the  penalty  of  one  pound  for 
every  name  omitted,  and  for  the  second  offence,  incur  the  penalty  of 
three  months’  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  of  his  electoral  rights  for 
three  years.” 

4  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  and  for  the  second  offence  three 
months’  imprisonment  and  be  deprived  of  his  elective  rights  for  three 
years.” 


APPENDIX  B 


231 


231] 

other  than  his  own,  and  of  having  voted  or  attempted  to  vote 
by  means  of  such  false  certificate,  shall  for  the  first  offence 
incur  the  penalty  of  six  months’  imprisonment,  and  for  the 
second  offence  six  months’  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  of 
his  elective  rights  for  five  years.1 

V.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted,  as  aforesaid, 
of  having  forged  a  voter’s  certificate,  or  of  having  forged  the 
name  of  any  person  to  any  certificate;  or  having  voted  or  at¬ 
tempted  to  vote  on  such  forged  certificate ;  knowing  such  to 
have  been  forged,  shall  for  the  first  offence  incur  the  penalty 
of  twelve  months’  imprisonment,  and  for  the  second  offence 
twelve  months’  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  of  his  elective 
rights  for  five  years.2 

VI.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid, 
of  having  forged,  or  caused  to  be  forged,  the  names  of  any 
voters  to  a  requisition  nominating  a  member  of  Parliament  or 
a  returning  officer,  shall  for  the  first  offence  incur  the  penalty 
of  three  months’  imprisonment,  and  twelve  months  for  the 
second  offence.3 

VII.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid 
of  bribery,  in  order  to  secure  his  election,  shall  be  subject  for 
the  first  offence  to  incur  the  penalty  of  two  years’  imprison¬ 
ment,  and  for  the  second  offence  shall  be  imprisoned  two 
years,  and  be  deprived  of  his  elective  rights  for  five  years. 

VIII.  That  any  agent  of  any  candidate,  or  any  other  per¬ 
son,  who  shall  be  convicted,  as  aforesaid,  of  bribery  at  any 
election,  shall  be  subject  for  the  first  offence  to  incur  the 
penalty  of  twelve  months’  imprisonment,  and  for  the  second 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  fixes  a  penalty  of  three  months  for  the  first 
offence,  and  three  months’  imprisonment  and  the  loss  of  elective  rights 
for  three  years  for  the  second  offence. 

2  In  the  revised  “Charter”  the  term  of  imprisonment  in  both  cases 
is  reduced  to  three  months,  and  the  loss  of  elective  rights  to  three 
years. 

8  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  and  for  the  second  offence  three 
months’  imprisonment,  and  to  be  deprived  of  his  elective  rights  for 
three  years.” 


APPENDIX  B 


232 


offence  twelve  months’  imprisonment,  and  be  deprived  of  his 
elective  rights  for  five  years. 

IX.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted,  as  aforesaid, 
of  going  from  house  to  house,  or  place  to  place,  to  solicit  in 
any  way  votes  in  favor  of  any  member  of  Parliament 1  or  re¬ 
turning  officer,  after  the  nomination  as  aforesaid,  shall  for 
the  first  offence  incur  the  penalty  of  one  month’s  imprisonment, 
and  for  the  second  offence  two  months’. 

X.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted  as  aforesaid 
of  calling  together,  or  causing  an  election  meeting  to  be  held 
in  any  district  during  the  day  of  election,  shall  for  the  first 
offence  incur  the  penalty  of  three  months’  imprisonment,  and 
for  the  second  offence  six  months. 

XI.  That  any  person  who  shall  be  convicted,  as  aforesaid, 
of  interrupting  the  balloting,  or  the  business  of  the  election, 
shall  incur  the  penalty  of  three  months’  imprisonment  for  the 
first  offence,  and  six  months’  for  the  second. 

XII.  That  if  any  messenger,  who  may  be  sent  with  the 
state  of  the  ballot  to  the  returning  officer,  or  with  any  other 
notice,  shall  wilfully  delay  the  same,  or  in  any  way  by  his 
consent  or  conduct  cause  the  same  to  be  delayed,  on  conviction 
as  aforesaid,  shall  incur  the  penalty  of  six  months’  imprison¬ 
ment. 

XIII.  That  any  returning  officer  who  shall  be  convicted,  as 
aforesaid,  of  having  neglected  to  appoint  proper  officers  as 
directed  by  this  Act,  to  see  that  proper  balloting  places  and 
balloting  boxes  are  provided,  and  to  give  the  notices  and  per¬ 
form  the  duties  herein  required  of  him,  shall  forfeit  for  each 
such  neglect  the  sum  of  £20. 

XIV.  That  if  any  returning  officer  be  found  gulty  by  the 
House  of  Commons  of  bribery  or  corrupt  practices  in  the 
execution  of  any  of  the  duties  herein  assigned  to  him,  he 
shall  incur  the  penalty  of  twelve  months’  imprisonment,  and 
be  deprived  of  his  elective  rights  for  five  years.2 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads:  “in  favor  of  any  candidate  for  Par¬ 
liament.” 

2  The  italicized  words  were  omitted  in  the  revised  “  Charter.” 


APPENDIX  B 


233 


233] 

XV.  That  if  any  deputy  returning  officer  be  convicted,  as 
aforesaid,  of  having  neglected  to  perform  any  of  the  duties 
herein  assigned  him,  he  shall  forfeit  for  such  neglect  three 
pounds. 

XVI.  That  if  any  deputy  returning  officer  be  convicted,  as 
aforesaid,  of  bribery  or  corrupt  practices  in  the  execution  of 
the  duties  of  his  office,  he  shall  incur  the  penalty  of  six  months’ 
imprisonment,  and  the  deprivation  of  his  elective  rights  for 
five  years.1 

XVII.  That  if  any  registration  clerk  be  convicted,  as  afore¬ 
said,  of  having  neglected  to  perform  any  of  the  duties  herein 
assigned  him,  he  shall  forfeit  for  each  such  neglect  five  pounds. 

XVIII.  That  if  any  registration  clerk  be  convicted,  as  afore¬ 
said,  of  bribery  or  corrupt  practices  in  the  execution  of  the 
duties  of  his  office,  he  shall  incur  the  penalty  of  six  months’ 
imprisonment,  and  the  deprivation  of  his  elective  rights  for 
five  years.2 

XIX.  That  if  the  parochial  officers  in  any  parish  neglect  or 
refuse  to  comply  with  any  of  the  provisions  of  this  Act,  they 
shall  forfeit  for  every  such  neglect  the  sum  of  £50. 3 

XX.  That  all  fines  and  penalties  incurred  under  the  pro¬ 
visions  of  this  Act,  be  recoverable  before  any  two  justices  of 
the  peace,  within  the  district  where  the  offence  shall  have 
been  committed,  and  in  default  of  payment,  the  said  justices 
shall  issue  their  warrant  of  distress  against  the  goods  and 
chattels  of  the  offender ;  or  in  default  of  sufficient  distress,  he 
shall  be  imprisoned  three  months.4 

N.  B. — All  Acts  and  parts  of  Acts  relating  to  registration, 
nominations,  or  elections,  as  well  as  duration  of  Parliament 
and  sittings  of  members,  must  be  repealed.5 

1  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads  :  “  three  years.” 

2  The  revised  “Charter”  provides  for  deprivation  of  rights  for  three 
years. 

3  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  or,  in  default  of  payment,  twelve 
months’  imprisonment.” 

4  The  revised  “  Charter  ”  reads :  “  shall  be  imprisoned  according  to 
the  provisions  of  this  Act.” 

5  The  revised  “Charter”  reads:  “are  hereby  repealed.” 


APPENDIX  C 


“  National  Petition 

“  Unto  the  Honorable  the  Commons  of  the  United  Kingdom 
of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  in  Parliament  assembled ,  the 
Petition  of  the  undersigned ,  their  suffering  countrymen , 

“  Humbly  Sheweth, 

“  That  we,  your  petitioners,  dwell  in  a  land  whose  merchants 
are  noted  for  enterprise,  whose  manufacturers  are  very  skil¬ 
ful,  and  whose  workmen  are  proverbial  for  their  industry. 

“  The  land  itself  is  goodly,  the  soil  rich,  and  the  temperature 
wholesome;  it  is  abundantly  furnished  with  the  materials  of 
commerce  and  trade ;  it  has  numerous  and  convenient  harbors ; 
in  facility  of  internal  communication  it  exceeds  all  others. 

“  For  three-and-twenty  years  we  have  enjoyed  a  profound 
peace. 

“  Yet,  with  all  these  elements  of  national  prosperity,  and 
with  every  disposition  and  capacity  to  take  advantage  of 
them,  we  find  ourselves  overwhelmed  with  public  and  private 
suffering. 

“We  are  bowed  down  under  a  load  of  taxes ;  which,  not¬ 
withstanding,  fall  greatly  short  of  the  wants  of  our  rulers ; 
our  traders  are  trembling  on  the  verge  of  bankruptcy;  our 
workmen  are  starving;  capital  brings  no  profit,  and  labor  no 
remuneration;  the  home  of  the  artificer  is  desolate,  and  the 
warehouse  of  the  pawnbroker  is  full ;  the  workhouse  is 
crowded,  and  the  manufactory  is  deserted. 

“We  have  looked  on  every  side,  we  have  searched  diligently 
in  order  to  find  out  the  causes  of  a  distress  so  sore  and  so 
long  continued. 

“We  can  discover  none  in  nature,  or  in  Providence. 

234  [234 


APPENDIX  C 


235J 


235 


“  Heaven  has  dealt  graciously  by  the  people;  but  the  fool¬ 
ishness  of  our  rulers  has  made  the  goodness  of  God  of  none 
effect. 

“  The  energies  of  a  mighty  kingdom  have  been  wasted  in 
building  up  the  power  of  selfish  and  ignorant  men,  and  its 
resources  squandered  for  their  aggrandisement. 

“  The  good  of  a  party  has  been  advanced  to  the  sacrifice  of 
the  good  of  the  nation ;  the  few  have  governed  for  the  interest 
of  the  few,  while  the  interest  of  the  many  has  been  neglected, 
or  insolently  and  tyrannously  trampled  upon. 

“  It  was  the  fond  expectation  of  the  people  that  a  remedy 
for  the  greater  part,  if  not  for  the  whole,  of  their  grievances, 
would  be  found  in  the  Reform  Act  of  1832. 

“  They  were  taught  to  regard  that  Act  as  a  wise  means  to 
a  worthy  end;  as  the  machinery  of  an  improved  legislation, 
when  the  will  of  the  masses  would  be  at  length  potential. 

“  They  have  been  bitterly  and  basely  deceived. 

“  The  fruit  which  looked  so  fair  to  the  eye  has  turned  to 
dust  and  ashes  when  gathered. 

“  The  Reform  Act  has  effected  a  transfer  of  power  from 
one  domineering  faction  to  another,  and  left  the  people  as 
helpless  as  before. 

“  Our  slavery  has  been  exchanged  for  an  apprenticeship  to 
liberty,  which  has  aggravated  the  painful  feeling  of  our  social 
degradation,  by  adding  to  it  the  sickening  of  still  deferred  hope. 

“We  come  before  your  Honorable  House  to  tell  you,  with 
all  humility,  that  this  state  of  things  must  not  be  permitted  to 
continue;  that  it  cannot  long  continue  without  very  seriously 
endangering  the  stability  of  the  throne  and  the  peace  of  the 
kingdom;  and  that  if  by  God’s  help  and  all  lawful  and  consti¬ 
tutional  appliances  an  end  can  be  put  to  it,  we  are  fully  re¬ 
solved  that  it  shall  speedily  come  to  an  end. 

“  We  tell  your  Honorable  House  that  the  capital  of  the 
master  must  no  longer  be  deprived  of  its  due  reward;  that 
the  laws  which  make  food  dear,  and  those  which  by  making 
money  scarce,  make  labor  cheap,  must  be  abolished ;  that  taxa¬ 
tion  must  be  made  to  fall  on  property,  not  on  industry;  that 


APPENDIX  C 


[236 


the  good  of  the  many,  as  it  is  the  only  legitimate  end,  so  must 
it  be  the  sole  study  of  the  Government. 

“  As  a  preliminary  essential  to  these  and  other  requisite 
changes;  as  means  by  which  alone  the  interests  of  the  people 
can  be  effectually  vindicated  and  secured,  we  demand  that 
those  interests  be  confided  to  the  keeping  of  the  people. 

“  When  the  state  calls  for  defenders,  when  it  calls  for 
money,  no  consideration  of  poverty  or  ignorance  can  be 
pleaded  in  refusal  or  delay  of  the  call. 

“  Required  as  we  are,  universally,  to  support  and  obey  the 
laws,  nature  and  reason  entitle  us  to  demand  that  in  the  mak¬ 
ing  of  the  laws,  the  universal  voice  should  be  implicitly 
listened  to. 

“  We  perform  the  duties  of  freemen ;  we  must  have  the 
privileges  of  freemen. 

“  We  demand  universal  suffrage. 

“  The  suffrage,  to  be  exempt  from  the  corruption  of  the 
wealthy  and  the  violence  of  the  powerful,  must  be  secret. 

“  The  assertion  of  our  right  necessarily  involves  the  power 
of  its  uncontrolled  exercise. 

“We  demand  the  ballot. 

“  The  connection  between  the  representatives  and  the  people, 
to  be  beneficial,  must  be  intimate. 

“  The  legislative  and  constituent  powers,  for  correction  and 
for  instruction,  ought  to  be  brought  into  frequent  contact. 

“  Errors  which  are  comparatively  light  when  susceptible  of 
a  speedy  popular  remedy,  may  produce  the  most  disastrous 
effects  when  permitted  to  grow  inveterate  through  years  of 
compulsory  endurance. 

“To  public  safety  as  well  as  public  confidence,  frequent 
elections  are  essential. 

“  We  demand  annual  parliaments. 

“  With  power  to  choose,  and  freedom  in  choosing,  the  range 
of  our  choice  must  be  unrestricted. 

“  We  are  compelled,  by  the  existing  laws,  to  take  for  our 
representatives  men  who  are  incapable  of  appreciating  our 
difficulties,  or  who  have  little  sympathy  with  them ;  merchants 


APPENDIX  C 


237] 


237 


who  have  retired  from  trade,  and  no  longer  feel  its  harassings ; 
proprietors  of  land  who  are  alike  ignorant  of  its  evils  and 
their  cure;  lawyers,  by  whom  the  honors  of  the  senate  are 
sought  after  only  as  means  of  obtaining  notice  in  the  courts. 

“  The  labors  of  a  representative  who  is  sedulous  in  the  dis¬ 
charge  of  his  duty  are  numerous  and  burdensome. 

“  It  is  neither  just,  nor  reasonable,  nor  safe,  that  they 
should  continue  to  be  gratuitously  rendered. 

“  We  demand  that  in  the  future  election  of  members  of  your 
Honorable  House  the  approbation  of  the  constituency  shall  be 
the  sole  qualification ;  and  that  to  every  representative  so 
chosen  shall  be  assigned,  out  of  the  public  taxes,  a  fair  and 
adequate  remuneration  for  the  time  which  he  is  called  upon 
to  devote  to  the  public  service. 

“  Finally,  we  would  most  earnestly  impress  on  your  Honor¬ 
able  House  that  this  petition  has  not  been  dictated  by  any 
idle  love  of  change;  that  it  springs  out  of  no  inconsiderate 
attachment  to  fanciful  theories;  but  that  it  is  the  result  of 
much  and  long  deliberation  and  of  convictions,  which  the 
events  of  each  succeeding  year  tend  more  and  more  to 
strengthen. 

“  The  management  of  this  mighty  kingdom  has  hitherto 
been  a  subject  for  contending  factions  to  try  their  selfish  ex¬ 
periments  upon. 

“  We  have  felt  the  consequences  in  our  sorrowful  experi¬ 
ence — short  glimmerings  of  uncertain  enjoyment  swallowed  up 
by  long  and  dark  seasons  of  suffering. 

“If  the  self-government  of  the  people  should  not  remove 
their  distresses,  it  will  at  least  remove  their  repinings. 

“  Universal  suffrage  will,  and  it  alone  can,  bring  true  and 
lasting  peace  to  the  nation ;  we  firmly  believe  that  it  will  also 
bring  prosperity. 

“  May  it,  therefore,  please  your  Honorable  House  to  take 
this  our  petition  into  your  most  serious  consideration ;  and  to 
use  your  utmost  endeavors,  by  all  constitutional  means,  to  have 
a  law  passed  granting  to  every  male  of  lawful  age,  sane  mind, 
and  unconvicted  of  crime  the  right  of  voting  for  members  of 


APPENDIX  C 


[238 


Parliament;  and  directing  all  future  elections  of  members  of 
Parliament  to  be  in  the  way  of  secret  ballot;  and  ordaining 
that  the  duration  of  Parliaments  so  chosen  shall  in  no  case 
exceed  one  year;  and  abolishing  all  property  qualifications  in 
the  members ;  and  providing  for  their  due  remuneration  while 
in  attendance  on  their  Parliamentary  duties. 

“  And  your  petitioners,  &c.” 


APPENDIX  D 


A  Dialogue  on  War,  Between  a  “Moral  Force”  Whig, 
and  a  Chartist,  by  Bronterre  1 

Quid  Nunc:  Well,  Bronterre,  so  we  are  going  to  have 
a  war  at  last. 

Bronterre:  To  have  a  war!  You  talk  of  war  as  if  it  were 
a  possession,  an  acquisition,  or  a  means  of  acquisition.  But 
how  do  you  know  we  are  going  to  have  a  war  ? 

Quid  Nunc:  Why,  all  the  newspapers  say  so;  but  you,  it 
seems,  don’t  like  war. 

Bronterre  :  Don’t  like  war !  Why  the  deuce  should  I  like 
war?  Why  should  I  like  murder  and  robbery,  for  murder 
and  robbery’s  sake ;  and  what  is  war  but  murder  and  robbery  ? 
But  whom  are  we  going  to  war  with? 

Quid  Nunc:  Ah!  that  is  not  yet  decided  on.  It  may  be 
with  Russia,  or  with  Canada,  or  with  France,  or  for  that 
matter,  with  all  three.  I  only  wish  it  may  be  with  some  of 
them,  and  soon:  for  allow  me  to  say,  I  think  differently  of 
war  from  what  you  do.  Wars  are  often  just  and  necessary; 
or  why  be  at  the  expense  of  maintaining  fleets  and  armies? 
Besides,  a  war  is  wanted  just  now,  to  give  a  stir,  a  fillip,  a 
new  impetus  to  the  country.  We  never  had  such  prosperity 
as  during  the  American  and  French  wars.  Can  you  deny  that? 

Bronterre:  You  perfectly  astonish  me!  You  who  pro¬ 
fess  to  be  a  thorough-going  liberal, — a  moral  force  man, — 
a  march  of  intellect  man, — a  greatest  happiness  principle  man, 
and  so  forth,  you!  to  talk  thus  of  war ,  as  if  it  were  mere  pas¬ 
time,  or  a  mere  paltry  commercial  question  of  pounds,  shill- 

1  McDouall’s  Chartist  and  Republican  Journal ,  nos.  21  and  22,  1841. 

239]  239 


240 


APPENDIX  D 


[24O 

ings  and  pence.  Hang  me,  my  good  friend,  if  I  can  at  all 
comprehend  your  slaughtering  liberality.  As  for  the  broken 
arms  and  broken  legs — the  bursting  of  bombs  scattering  death 
all  around — the  sacking  and  burning  of  whole  towns  and 
villages,  and  ravishing  of  wives  and  virgin  daughters — whole 
fields  strewn  with  dead  bodies — hospitals  crowded  with  agon¬ 
ized  and  dying  wretches,  and  their  hardly  less  wretched  sur¬ 
vivors,  exposed  to  every  imaginable  hardship  and  privation — 
exposed  to  the  war  of  elements  as  well  as  the  war  of  bombs 
and  muskets — and  often  obliged  to  feed  on  cats,  rats,  and 
stinking  horse-flesh ;  and  as  for  these  and  the  like  pretty 
incidents  of  war,  they  evidently  form  no  item  of  your  profit- 
and-loss  account.  You  are  too  liberal,  I  suppose,  or  too  much 
a  man  of  the  world  to  regard  trifles  of  that  sort,  more  es¬ 
pecially  as  you  can  afford  to  keep  your  own  carcase  out  of  the 
way  of  the  howitzers.  But  tell  me,  my  good  friend,  how  it 
happens,  that  you,  being  a  disciple  and  admirer  of  Joseph 
Hume,  make  no  distinction  between  fighting  against  Canada, 
and  fighting  against  France  or  Russia?  Do  you  mean  to  say 
it  is  quite  indifferent  to  you  with  whom  we  go  to  war,  pro¬ 
vided  only  that  we  give  a  “  new  fillip  or  impetus  to  the  coun¬ 
try  ?  ”  Do  you — 

Quid  Nunc:  Are  you  done? 

Bronterre:  Go  on. 

Quid  Nunc:  By  jingo,  Bronterre,  if  I  did  not  know  you  so 
well,  and  if  you  did  not  use  “  hell  "  and  the  “  devil  ”  so  often, 
I  should  almost  fancy  you  to  be  a  Quaker,  you  have  such  a 
pious  horror  of  war.  But  what  use  is  there  railing  at  what 
neither  you  nor  I  can  prevent?  There  cannot  be  war,  of 
course,  without  killing  and  wounding,  but  as  there  were  wars 
before  you  and  I  were  born,  so  believe  me,  there  will  be  wars 
after  you  and  I  are  dead.  Now  for  your  question,  (and  mind 
that  you  answer  mine  in  turn),  you  ask  why  I,  a  liberal,  make 
no  distinction  between  fighting  against  Canada,  and  fighting 
against  France  and  Russia?  I  do  make  a  distinction.  On 
political  grounds,  I  should  be  sorry  to  see  a  war  against  the 


APPENDIX  D 


241 


241] 

Canadian  insurgents,  because  I  approve  their  cause;  but  I 
desire  one  on  my  brother’s  account,  who  being  a  saddler  and 
harness  maker,  had  recently  a  Government  contract  for  the 
supply  of  saddles  and  harness  for  our  Canadian  troops,  and 
who  is  promised  another  job  or  two  if  the  war  goes  on. 
Now,  having  frankly  answered  your  question,  do  you  as 
frankly  answer  me  those  three:  1st.  If  our  Indian  possessions 
be  attacked  by  Russian  intrigue  and  Russian  arms,  is  it  not 
your  duty,  and  the  duty  of  all  true  patriots  to  assist  in  de¬ 
fending  them,  and  by  war,  if  necessary?  2nd.  If  our  Mexican 
trade  be  similarly  endangered  by  France,  or  our  Mediterranean 
trade  by  the  same  power,  are  we  not  similarly  justified  in 
defending  both  against  France,  and  by  war,  if  necessary?  3rd. 
If,  in  both  these  cases,  you  disapprove  of  war,  in  what  case 
would  you  approve  of  it;  or  would  you,  in  all  possible  cases, 
and  under  all  circumstances,  dissuade  the  working  classes  from 
participating  in  war?  No  declamation,  now!  But  straight¬ 
forward  answers. 

Bronterre:  Well,  then,  I  shall  be  as  frank  as  you  have 
been.  To  your  first  question  I  reply, — Let  all  who  have  pos¬ 
sessions  in  India,  or  all  who  profit  by  wrhat  you  call  our 
“  Indian  possessions  ”,  be  off  to  India,  and  fight  a  thousand 
battles  for  them,  if  they  like.  Let  the  proprietors  of  the  East 
India  Stock,  let  the  owners  of  East  India  merchantmen,  let 
those  English  and  Irish  merchants  and  brokers,  and  writers 
and  underwriters,  and  governors  and  judges,  and  naval  and 
military  officers,  and  liver-colored  nabobs,  and  all  such  other 
aristocrats  and  commercial  speculators  as  have  either  wrung, 
or  are  now  wringing,  fortunes  out  of  Hindoo  sweat  and 
misery — let  all  such  persons  go  and  fight  for  our  “  Indian 
possessions  ”,  but  let  them  not  mock  our  degradation  by  asking 
us,  working  people,  to  fight  along  with  them,  either  for  our 
“  possessions  ”  in  India,  or  anywhere  else,  seeing  that  we  do 
not  possess  a  single  acre  of  ground,  or  any  other  description 
of  property  in  our  ozmt  country,  much  less  colonies,  or  “  pos¬ 
sessions  ”,  in  any  other,  having  been  robbed  of  everything  we 


242 


APPENDIX  D 


[242 

ever  earned,  by  the  upper  and  middle  classes.  Let  the  parties 
I  have  described  go  and  light  their  own  battles  against  Russia, 
who,  for  all  we  care,  may  seize  “  our  Indian  possessions  ” 
tomorrow  if  she  likes.  We,  the  working  people  of  Great 
Britain  and  Ireland,  have  no  interest  whatever  in  defending 
those  “  possessions  ”,  nor  any  colonial  possessions,  nor  any 
other  description  of  possessions  belonging  to  men  who  have 
robbed  us  of  our  political  rights  and  franchises.  On  the  con¬ 
trary,  we  have  an  interest  in  prospective  loss  or  ruin  of  all 
such  “  possessions  ”,  seeing  they  are  but  instruments  of  power 
in  the  hands  of  our  domestic  oppressors.  Yes,  yes,  by  all 
means,  let  Russia  seize  them,  if  she  can,  and  we  shall  but 
thank  God  and  Russia  for  the  seizure. 

To  your  2nd  question,  my  reply  is — I  care  not  how  soon 
France  engrosses  or  destroys  “  our  Mexican  trade  ”,  nor  to 
what  extent  her  Algerine  conquests  may  operate  to  the  pre¬ 
judice  of  our  commerce  in  the  Levant  or  elsewhere.  I  should 
rather  see  the  whole  of  that  commerce  utterly  extinguished, 
than  see  one  solitary  working  man  lose  a  leg  or  an  arm,  in 
war,  to  defend  it.  As  commerce  is  now  conducted,  it  is  not 
only  without  profit,  but  it  is  absolutely  ruinous  to  the  pro¬ 
ductive  classes  of  this  country.  When  England  had  hardly 
any  foreign  commerce  at  all,  (in  the  year  1495),  an  English 
laborer’s  weekly  wages  would  buy  199  pints  of  wheat,  and  an 
artisan’s  weekly  wages  292  pints  of  wheat.  We  have  now 
more  foreign  trade  than  any  other  three  nations  in  the  world, 
and,  at  least  one  hundred  times  more  of  it  than  we  had  in 
1495  1  yet  an  English  laborer’s  weekly  wages  will  not  bring 
him,  in  this  present  year,  more  than  80  or  90  pints  of  wheat, 
and  an  artisan’s  hardly  150  pints;  not  to  speak  of  the  difficulty 
of  getting  employment, — a  difficulty  unknown  in  1495.  Talk 
of  our  foreign  trade,  indeed !  And  fighting  for  it,  too !  Let 
those  who  profit  by  it  go  and  fight  for  it.  L$t  the  merchants 
and  shipowners,  and  big  manufacturers  and  capitalists,  who 
gain  rapid  fortunes  by  it,  let  these  persons  go  and  fight  for  it. 
Or  let  our  aristocracy,  to  whom  it  brings  tropical  fruits,  and 
oriental  perfumes,  and  rich  furs  and  cashmeres,  and  pearls 


APPENDIX  D 


243 


243] 

and  pieces,  and  shells  and  turtle,  and  delicious  wines,  and 
cordials,  and  ivory  and  lace,  and  silks  and  satins,  and  turkey 
carpets,  and  Chinese  ornaments,  and  birds  of  paradise,  etc.,  etc., 
let  these  parties  go  and  fight  for  it.  To  us,  the  working 
people,  it  brings  next  to  nothing  in  exchange  for  the  forty  or 
fifty  millions’  worth  of  goods  we  are  every  year  sending 
abroad.  The  only  commodities  the  working  class  want  from 
abroad  are  necessaries,  and  these  are  excluded  by  our  Corn 
Laws.  No,  no,  Mr.  Quid  Nunc!  If  Englishmen  are  to  fight 
now-a-days,  it  must  be  for  something  better  than  you  imagine. 
But  no  fighting  for  “  our  foreign  trade  ” !  No  fighting  for  it 
at  any  rate  until  we  have  obtained  our  political  rights  and 
reformed  our  commercial  system.  I  am  no  enemy  of  com¬ 
merce,  if  commerce  means  what  it  ought  to  mean;  but  perdi¬ 
tion,  eternal  perdition  to  the  system  which,  under  that  name, 
is  now  impoverishing  and  brutalising  the  largest  and  best  part 
of  the  human  family. 

To  your  3d  question  my  reply  is — I  have  so  inveterate  and 
mortal  an  antipathy  to  war  (regarding  it  as  but  another  name 
for  murder  and  robbery  on  a  large  scale),  that  only  the  direst 
necessity  could  induce  me  to  be,  under  any  circumstances,  its 
advocate;  yet,  there  is  one  great  barbarous  Power  in  Europe 
against  which  I  should  gladly  see  a  war  got  up  even  this 
very  day. 

Quid  Nunc:  You  mean  Russia? 

Bronterre:  Softly,  my  good  Sir.  I  mean  a  power  more 
barbarous  and  barbarising  than  all  other  living  despotisms  put 
together,  that  of  Russia  included. 

Quid  Nunc:  By  the  ghost  of  Nicholas!  that  is  impossible; 
but  name  it. 

Bronterre:  I  will  neither  name  it  nor  describe  it.  You 
being  a  disciple  of  Hume  and  Grote,  and  I  being  the  very 
antipodes  of  that  school,  we  cannot  possibly  understand  one 
another.  Were  I  simply  to  name  it — you  would  laugh  out¬ 
right,  and  to  describe  it  I  am  incapable.  But,  as  I  perceive 


244 


APPENDIX  D 


[244 

your  curiosity  is  on  the  rack  I  will  leave  a  copy  of  the  last 
week’s  Northern  Liberator ,  and  from  its  leading  article  you 
may  possibly  be  able  to  form  some  faint  idea  of  the  power  I 
allude  to.  Farewell ! 

*  *  * 

The  article  referred  to  describes  the  English  ruling  classes 
as  “  more  despotic  than  despotism.”  Enumerating  the  evil 
effects  of  the  Corn  Laws,  the  New  Poor  Law,  the  factory 
system,  the  lack  of  universal  suffrage,  and  the  like,  Bronterre 
concludes  his  philippic  in  his  characteristic  style : 

Could  despotism  do  more  than  fill  the  country  with  starva¬ 
tion,  poverty,  tears,  and  blood;  could  despotism  do  more  than 
cover  it  with  prisons,  police  houses,  correction  houses,  peni¬ 
tentiaries,  and  Poor  Law  bastiles,  where  cruelties  the  most 
atrocious  and  crimes  the  most  unnatural  are  perpetrated  upon 
the  wretched  people  by  the  horrid  officials  of  these  dens ;  could 
despotism  the  most  devilish  do  more  than  treat  a  people  thus, 
and  then  systematically  refuse  to  listen  to  their  complaints, 
and  treat  their  tears  with  menaces  and  their  cries  with  abusive 
calamities;  in  short,  could  the  despotism  of  Nero,  Tiberius, 
Helagabalus  and  Herod,  joined  in  one,  do  more  than  invert 
and  remorselessly  carry  into  execution  such  a  system  as  now 
exists  in  England ?  .  .  .  Men  of  England,  and  of  Scotland, 
and  of  Ireland!  will  you  ever  again  shed  your  blood  in  de¬ 
fence  of  such  a  system?  If  you  do,  you  deserve  more  than 
you  have  already  suffered.  But  I  wrong  you  by  the  question. 
I  forget,  at  the  moment,  that  by  recent  demonstrations  in  favor 
of  Chartism  you  had  virtually  sealed  the  doom  of  that  system. 
Your  long  and  bloody  anti-Jacobin  war  against  France  was 
the  last  you  will  ever  engage  in  to  uphold  exclusive  govern¬ 
ment.  Henceforth  if  you  go  to  war,  it  shall  be  to  fight  for 
yourselves.  No  more  anti-Jacobin  wars!  No  coalition  min¬ 
istry!  No  Tory-strong  government!  That’s  the  ticket. 


INDEX 


Aitken,  William,  138 
Ashley,  Lord,  70,  71,  73 
Attwood,  Thomas,  leader  of  Birming¬ 
ham  Political  Union,  36,  120;  his 
view  of  the  Reform  Act,  37;  opposi¬ 
tion  to  New  Poor  Law,  43,  44;  life 
and  views,  120,  121,  180,  182;  his 
plan  of  a  sacred  month ,  139;  and  the 
National  Petition,  153,  165,  179,  180, 
183;  and  the  Manifesto,  170 

Babeuf,  113,  118,  119 
Bamford,  Samuel,  31 
Bank  of  England,  173 
Bedchamber  Plot,  40 
Benbow,  William,  205 
Benefit  clubs,  32,  75 
Beniowski,  Major,  15 1 
Bentham,  Jeremy,  63 
Birmingham  Currency  School,  120 
Birmingham  yournal,  The ,  1 53 
Birmingham  Political  Union,  36,91,92, 
120,  139,  142,  153 

Birmingham  Town  Council  on  the  Bull 
Ring  attack,  186 
Botanical  meetings,  32 
Bowring,  Dr.,  91 
Boycott,  170 

British  Association  for  Promoting  Co¬ 
operative  Knowledge,  102 
Bronterre  on  the  Reform  Bill,  37;  on 
the  New  Poor  Law,  50,  51,  69;  on 
universal  suffrage,  81,  82,  84,  114; 
on  the  petition  of  the  London  Work¬ 
ingmen’s  Association,  89,  90 ;  on 
t  h  e  o  r  e  t  i  c  al  differences,  101 ;  and 
O’Connor,  107,  108;  life  and  views, 
1 12-120,  123:  Nationalization  of 
land,  1 15;  and  Lovett,  114,  120;  and 
Harney,  133,  159;  on  previous  peti¬ 
tions,  82,  154;  and  the  General  Con¬ 
vention,  157;  on  physical  force,  158, 
172;  at  public  demonstrations,  172, 
173;  on  the  sacred  month,  183,  185; 
sentenced,  205 

Brougham,  Lord,  on  the  Whig  rule,  39, 
40;  and  the  New  Poor  Law,  52,  53, 
14 1 ;  on  behalf  of  Lovett,  178;  on 
behalf  of  John  Frost,  203 

245] 


Bull  Ring,  175,  176,  186,  187;  riots 
176,  178,  188,  189 
Buonarroti,  113,  118,  119 
Burdett,  Francis,  26,  120 
Burke,  Edmund,  24,  25,  28 
Byron,  140 

Campbell,  John,  Attorney-General,  202, 
203 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  21,  39,  54,  55,  206 
Carpenter’s  Political  Pamphlets,  113 
Cartwright,  John,  23,  24 
Central  Committee  of  radical  unions, 
106 

Chamber  of  Commerce,  80 
Child  Labor,  73,  74,  in 
Cleave,  John,  84,  89,  91,  158 
Cobbett,  William,  28-31;  opposi¬ 
tion  to  New  Poor  Law,  43,  50,  53, 
66,  67;  maltreated,  76;  on  the  issue 
of  the  working  class,  81 ;  and  Att¬ 
wood,  121;  and  Frost,  137 
Collective  bargaining,  right  of,  77 
Collins,  John,  177,  186-9 
Combination  Laws,  75 
Communism,  109 

Consolidated  National  Trades  Union, 
104 

Constitutional  Society,  23 
Cooper,  Thomas,  107 
Corn  Laws,  27,  34,  63,  182 
Crime,  66,  67,  74 
Cromwell,  22 

Crawford,  W.  S.  90,  91,  95 
Crown  and  Anchor  meetings,  90,  158, 
164 

Demonstrations,  32,  139,  140,  142,  143, 
146-149,  153,  172,  173,  189 
Destructive ,  The,  1 1 3 
Disraeli  on  the  Whig  rule,  40;  opposi¬ 
tion  to  New  Poor  Law,  43;  on  the 
National  Petition,  179,  182,  183 
Distress,  28,  55-69,  93,  98,  138 
Douglas,  R.  K.,  153 
Duke  of  Richmond,  23-6 
Dundee  Advertiser,  The ,  150 
Dwelling  conditions,  57,  58,  66 

245 


INDEX 


246 


Edgeworth,  Lowell,  112 
Elliot,  Ebenezer,  59 
Emigration,  56,  57 

Fennell,  Allred  Owen,  175 
Fielden,  John,  91,  147 
Foreign  Affairs  Committee,  138 
Fowle,  F.  W.  47 
Fox,  Charles  James,  24,  27 
French  Encyclopedists,  23 
French  Revolution,  24,  25,  33,  134,  153, 

157,  181,  193 

Frost,  John,  life  and  views,  136-137; 
and  the  Crown  and  Anchor  meeting, 

158,  164;  and  Lord  Russell,  162-165; 
and  public  demonstrations,  173;  on 
the  sacred  month ,  183;  seeking  miti¬ 
gation  of  Vincent’s  treatment,  190, 
191;  and  the  Newport  Riot,  191,  192, 
195-7,  199;  last  public  letter,  192- 
194;  trial  and  sentence,  200,  201, 
204;  pardoned,  204 

General  Convention  of  the  Industrious 
Classes,  143-186 

General  Council  of  the  Convention,  185 
General  strike,  see  sacred  month 
Godwin,  William,  77 
Goulburn,  Sergeant,  187,  188 
Grand  National  Consolidated  Trades 
Union,  80 
Gray,  John,  77 

Habeas  corpus  act,  27,  31 
Hall,  Charles,  77 
Hampden  Club,  28,  30,  31 
Harcourt,  Maurice,  47 
Hardy,  Thomas,  26 

Harney,  George  Julian,  prominent 
member  of  trade  unions,  84;  his  life 
and  views,  132-134;  at  torch  light 
meetings,  148;  and  the  General  Con¬ 
vention,  157;  at  the  Crown  and 
Anchor  meeting,  158;  on  Chartist 
elections,  159,  160;  on  the  ulterior 
measures,  1 70;  at  public  demonstra¬ 
tions,  172;  in  the  riot- week,  178 
Harvey,  D.  W.  91 

Hetherington,  Henry,  84,  87,  89,  91, 
95,  121,  158 
Hindley,  Charles,  91 
Hodgskin,  Thomas,  77 
Holloway  Head,  178 
Holyoake,  George  Jacob,  105,  108,  139, 
150,  161,  178 

House  of  Lords,  reform  of,  91 


Hume,  Joseph,  90 

Hunt,  Henry,  32,  35,  36,  76,  112 

Industrial  Revolution,  74 
Irish  famine,  55;  emigration,  56 

Jacobinism,  26,  ill 

Jones,  William,  195,  199,  201,  204 

Kay,  James  P.,  47,  60,  72 

Labor  legislation,  70,  71 
Leader,  J.  T.,  90,  91,  204I 
Levellers,  22,  25 
Lock-outs,  80 

London  Cooperative  Trading  Associa¬ 
tion,  102 

London  Corresponding  Society,  26-27 
London  Democrat,  The,  133,  151,  152, 
159,  170 

London  Democratic  Association,  no, 
in,  133,  157 

London  Mercury,  The,  113 
London  Times ,  The,oy) 

London  Working  Men’s  Association, 
84,  88,  89,  98,  99,  104,  106,  no,  120, 
121,  122,  137,  143,  156;  addresses, 
86,  87,  91,  92-95*  I00»  I29>  145;  pe¬ 
tition  for  new  Constitution,  89;  Crown 
and  Anchor  meeting,  90;  and  the 
committee  of  twelve,  91,  95;  and  the 
Chartist  agitation,  97,  135,  140;  and 
Stephens,  129;  influence  on  the  wane, 
146 

Lovett,  William,  prominent  member  of 
trade  unions,  84;  on  the  London 
Working  Men’s  Association,  86;  sec¬ 
retary  of  the  L.  W.  M.  A.,  87;  author 
of  the  petition  of  the  L.  W.  M.  A.,  90; 
at  theCrown  and  Anchor  meeting,  90, 
91;  correspondence  with  Lord  Rus¬ 
sell,  92,  93;  author  of  the  People’s 
Charter,  95,  104;  life  and  views,  102- 
105;  and  O’Connor,  107,  192;  and 
Bronterre,  114;  and  Hetherington, 
12 1 ;  and  Stephens,  122,  129;  his  res¬ 
olution  at  the  Palace  Yard  meeting, 
145;  and  the  General  Convention, 
156-158;  secretary  of  the  General 
Convention,  156;  on  the  Manifesto, 
170;  his  arrest,  177;  his  trial  and 
defence,  186,  187,  188;  his  imprison¬ 
ment,  189,  190;  on  the  Newport  Riot, 
191,  192 

McDouall,  176 
Macerone,  Colonel,  15 1 


INDEX 


247 


Manchester  Massacre,  32 
Manifesto  of  the  General  Convention, 
166-168,  170 
Marat,  ill,  133,  156 
Marsden,  Richard,  156 
Melbourne,  Lord,  36,  61,  203 
Metropolitan  police,  176,  179,  187 
Metropolitan  Political  Union,  103 
Mill,  James,  47 

Monetary  reform,  see  Attwood 
Moore,  R.,  91 

Moral  force,  99,  120,  122,  142,  153,  (see 
also  Lovett) 

Morning  Chronicle ,  188 
Mortality,  65,  66 

National  Petition,  143,  145,  1 53— 1 59, 

165,  174,  179-183 
National  Political  Union,  33,  36 
National  Reformer ,  The ,  see  Bronterre 
National  Union  of  the  Working  Classes, 

35*  I04 

Nationalization  of  land,  101,  115 
Newport  Riot,  190- 192,  194- 199,  206 
North,  Lord,  24 

Northern  Star ,  The ,  107,  108,  112,  1 13, 
152 

O’Brien,  see  Bronterre 
O’Connell,  Daniel,  on  the  New  Poor 
Law,  44;  and  the  People’s  Charter, 
90,  91,  95;  and  O’Connor,  106 
O’Connor,  Feargus,  on  the  New  Poor 
Law  and  machinery,  51,  52,  no;  on 
Chartism,  70;  life  and  views,  105- 
112,  122;  and  Lovett,  107,  192;  and 
Bronterre,  114;  and  Attwood,  121; 
and  Stephens,  123;  and  Harney,  133; 
speeches,  141-144;  and  the  London 
Working  Men’s  Association,  143;  at 
public  demonstrations,  146-148,  172- 
3;  and  the  General  Convention,  138, 

166,  172;  on  the  sacred  month ,  185; 
and  the  Newport  Riot,  192;  sen¬ 
tenced,  205 

O’Connor,  Roderick,  105,  107 
O’Connor,  Roger,  105 
Oastler,  Richard,  70,  123 
Operative ,  The ,  113 
Owen,  Robert,  77,  78,  80,  103,  118 
Owenism,  78,  84 

Paine,  Thomas,  26-7,  137 
Palace  Yard  demostration,  143,  149 
People’s  Charter,  publication  of,  95,  97 
Phillips,  Thomas,  mayor  of  Newport, 
197,  200 


Physical  force,  100,  ill,  123,  132,  142- 
4,  149,  152,  156,  170,  178.  (See  also 
Harney  and  Stephens) 

Pitt,  the  Earl  of  Chatham,  22 
Pitt,  William,  22,  24,  26,  27 
Place,  Francis,  36,  76,  78,  95,  102,  104, 
106,  107,  123,  189 
Pollack,  Frederick,  203 
Poor  Law,  New,  39,  40,  43,  55,  66,  68, 
69,81,  106,  no,  hi,  123,  126,  129, 
138,  141,  147,  153,  193 
Poor  Law,  Old,  40,  42 
Poor  relief,  54,  68 

Poor  Man's  Guardian ,  7%<?,  35,  1 1 3, 121 
Prentice,  Archibald,  61 

Prorogation  of  Parliament,  91,  159 
Reform  bills,  22,  23,  24,  27 
Reform  Bill  of  1832,  33,  35-37,  63,  92, 
120,  175 
Ricardo,  34 
Riot  Act,  176 

Riots,  28,  31,  176,  202.  (See  Bull  Ring 
and  Newport  Riot) 

Robespierre,  ill,  113,  119 
Roebuck,  J.  A.,  72,  90,  91,  95,  107 
Rotten  House  of  Commons ,  The ,  88,  89 
Rotundism,  84,  104 
Rousseau,  23 

Russell,  Lord  John,  hero  of  Reform 
Bill,  36,  39;  “Finality  Jack,”  39; 
letter  to,  on  children  in  the  work- 
house,  48;  correspondence  with 
Lovett,  92,  93;  on  the  torch -light 
demonstrations,  149;  and  John  Frost 
162-5;  on  the  General  Convention, 
165;  his  letter  to  magistrates,  166; 
on  the  National  Petition,  180-182 

St.  Just,  hi 

Sacred  Month ,  139,  142,  169,  173, 183-5 
Sadler,  Michael  Thomas,  70 
Scott,  Walter,  112 
Seligman,  Edwin  R.  A.,  9,  76,  78 
Senior,  Nassau  W.,  on  the  old  Poor 
Laws,  41 ;  on  dwelling  conditions, 
66;  on  hours  of  labor,  71,  72,  74;  on 
labor  combinations,  79 
Shell,  George,  199 
Shelley,  32,  33 
Short  Time  Committee,  71 
Simultaneous  meetings,  168,  169,  172, 
1 73»  175 

“  Six  Acts  ”  of  1819,  75 
“  Six  points,”  21,  24,  90,  91,  138,  148 
Smith,  Adam,  56,  75 


INDEX 


248 


Smith,  Sydney,  34,  38 
Socialism,  84,  109,  133 
Socialists,  71,  77 

Society  for  Constitutional  Information, 
24 

Society  of  the  Friends  of  the  People,  23 
Society  of  the  Supporters  of  the  Bill  of 
Rights,  22 
Southern  Star ,  1 1 3 
Spencean  Philanthropists,  31 
Spies,  26,  1 61 
Stanhope,  23 

Stephens,  J.  R.,  122,  146,  148,  149; 
life  and  views,  123-133;  indictment, 
165;  sentenced,  189 

Taylor,  Dr.,  176,  177 
Ten  Hour  Movement,  71 
Terrorism,  see  Physical  force 
Thistlewood,  33 

Thompson,  Colonel  T.  P.,  65,  90,  91, 

95 

Thompson,  William,  77 
Tin  dal,  Nicholas,  Chief  Justice,  200, 
202 

Torch-light  processions,  148-150 
Tories,  opposed  to  New  Poor  Law ,  53; 
attitude  towards  labor  legislation,  70, 
71 ;  defeated  Liberals,  95;  and  Ro- 
tundists,  104;  and  Whigs,  8,  166, 
168;  and  the  National  Petition,  179 
Trade  Unionism,  75,  77,  78,  80,  84,  104 
Twopenny  Despatch ,  89,  113,  121 

Ulterior  measures,  156,  168,  169,  170, 
1 73»  175 


Underground  societies,  138 
Unemployment,  see  Distress 
United  Irishman,  105,  107 

Victoria,  Queen,  92,  140,  187,  203 
Vincent,  Henry,  prominent  member  of 
trade  unions,  84;  and  the  London 
Working  Men’s  Association,  89,  135; 
member  of  committee  of  twelve,  91; 
as  an  orator,  135,  142;  in  the  West, 
147;  organizer  of  female  associations, 
147,  150;  in  Wales,  147,  150,  160; 
arrest,  165;  imprisonment,  190;  and 
Welsh  rising,  191 

Watson,  J.,  91 
Wages,  60,  64 
Wakley,  T.,  91 

Welsh  Chartists,  see  Newport  Riot  and 
Vincent 

Westgate  Hotel,  197-9,  204 
Western  Vindicatory  The ,  200 
Wheat,  price  of,  28,  63 
Whigs,  8,  23-4,  34-46,  pledges,  63,  142; 
denunciation  of,  69,  92,  166,  168, 179; 
hostile  attitude  towards  labor  legisla¬ 
tion,  70,71;  opposition  to  Liberals, 
95;  and  Rotundists,  104;  and  the 
National  Petition,  179,  180;  victory 
of,  206 

William  IV,  91 

Williams,  Zephaniah,  195,  199,  201,  204 
Wilson,  William  Carus,  49 
Woman  labor,  73 
Workhouse-test,  42 


VITA 


The  author  of  this  monograph  was  born  May  n,  1882, 
in  Volhynia,  Russia.  The  son  of  a  Hebrew  scholar,  he  was 
taught  Hebrew,  Talmud  and  the  rabbinical  literature  up 
to  the  age  of  fourteen.  He  was  then  allowed  to  take  up  a 
course  in  a  Russian  classical  gymnasium.  In  the  Spring  of 
1903,  he  emigrated  to  Switzerland  and  from  there,  in 
September  of  the  same  year,  to  the  United  States.  In  1906 
he  was  admitted  as  a  senior  student  to  Columbia  College 
and,  upon  his  graduation  in  1907  with  the  degree  of  A.  B., 
registered  under  the  Faculty  of  Political  Science  of  Columbia 
University,  choosing  Economics  as  a  major  and  Sociology 
and  Philosophy  as  minors.  He  received  the  degree  of  A.M. 
in  1908.  In  1907  and  1908  he  was  awarded  University 
Scholarships  in  the  Department  of  Economics.  In  his  post¬ 
graduate  studies  he  took  courses  with  Professors  Seligman, 
John  B.  Clark,  Seager,  Giddings,  H.  L.  Moore,  Simkhovitch, 
Mussey,  Dewey,  Montague,  and  others  and  attended  the 
Seminar  in  Economics.  In  1909  he  was  employed  by  the 
National  Monetary  Commission.  From  October,  1910,  to 
February,  1912,  he  was  connected  with  the  work  of  the 
Tariff  Board  in  Washington,  D.  C.  He  then  held  the 
position  of  Expert  Special  Agent  with  the  New  York  State 
Department  of  Labor  until  September,  1914,  when  he  ac¬ 
cepted  the  office  of  general  secretary  and  executive  director 
of  a  fraternal  death  and  sick  benefit  insurance  corporation. 


249 


t>K*vswmr  of  u-unois  ushary 


apr  j.  7  m? 

THE  CHARTIST  MOVEMENT 


In  Its  Social  and  Economic  Aspects 


BY 

FRANK  F.  ROSENBLATT,  A.  M. 


PART  I 


SUBMITTED  IN  PARTIAL  FULFILMENT  OF  THE  REQUIREMENTS 
FOR  THE  DEGREE  OF  DOCTOR  OF  PHILOSOPHY 

IN  THE 

Faculty  of  Political  Science 
Columbia  University 


NEW  YORK 

1916 


, , 1 %Mrm 


‘•i'VT,. 


' 


. 


•  §  .  - 


' 


